‘Marriage Is Not a Service Contract’: Bombay High Court Says Wife Not Cooking or Cleaning Is Not Cruelty

In a significant ruling challenging traditional gender roles within marriage, the Bombay High Court has held that a wife’s inability or refusal to cook and clean cannot be treated as “cruelty” under the law.

Refusing to grant divorce to a man who accused his wife of not performing household chores, the court strongly observed that “marriage is a partnership of equals” and that “a wife is not a maid.”

“Marriage is a partnership of equals. It is not a service contract or an employment agreement, and wives cannot be treated as bonded maids,” the Bombay High Court ruled.

A bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande, in its May 8 judgment, said a woman’s inability to perform domestic work such as cooking or cleaning does not amount to mental cruelty.

“A wife's inability to perform domestic chores - such as cooking or cleaning - cannot, in and of itself, be construed as cruelty,” the court stated. ‘Be Happy, No Alimony Asked’: Supreme Court Grants Divorce, Orders Man To Pay INR 50 Lakh Despite Wife Not Seeking It.

The ruling came while setting aside a 2010 divorce decree passed by the Bandra Family Court, which had accepted the husband’s claims of cruelty. The High Court also overturned the earlier order denying maintenance to the wife.

The husband, a Chartered Accountant (CA), had filed for divorce in 2004, just two years after the couple married. He alleged that his wife did not cook, disobeyed his parents, behaved rudely, and caused him mental stress.

However, the wife denied the allegations and claimed she was forced to handle all household chores alone, including washing clothes and dishes, cooking, and cleaning. She also alleged she was made to eat leftover food and faced harassment from her husband and in-laws. ‘You’re Not Marrying a Maid’: Supreme Court Says Household Chores Not Grounds for Cruelty in Divorce Case.

The High Court noted that the allegations raised by the husband were “ordinary” marital disagreements commonly seen during the early stages of marriage.

Such “ordinary bickering” between spouses, the court said, cannot automatically be elevated to the level of cruelty.

The bench clarified that for an act to qualify as cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, it must involve serious and persistent behaviour that makes it impossible for spouses to continue living together.

According to the court, cruelty would require grave acts such as continuous humiliation, false allegations, or behaviour severe enough to damage a partner’s reputation and mental well-being.

The court also rejected the Family Court’s reasoning for denying maintenance to the woman merely because she had advertised “Art and Craft” classes.

“There is no concrete evidence to establish that this activity was generating a regular or substantial independent income for the wife,” the court observed.

Taking note of the husband’s professional qualifications and earning capacity as a Chartered Accountant, the High Court directed him to pay the wife INR 10,000 per month as maintenance along with an additional INR 10,000 per month towards accommodation expenses.

The bench further pointed out that the testimony of the husband’s mother and maternal aunt could not solely be relied upon to establish cruelty, calling them “interested witnesses.”

The judgment is being seen as a major observation on equality within marriage and women’s roles in Indian households, reinforcing that domestic chores cannot be treated as compulsory duties imposed upon wives.

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on May 27, 2026 07:06 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).