Atul Subhash Suicide. How Another 20-Year Alimony Battle Spotlights Judicial Delays And The Urgent Need For Reform—Why Did It Take The SC Two Decades To Deliver Justice?

The heartbreaking case of Atul Subhash has reignited debates around divorce, alimony, and the potential misuse of family court systems. Atul’s suicide, allegedly linked to a protracted legal battle over a staggering alimony demand of ₹3 crore, has drawn widespread public attention. The incident has sparked outrage, sympathy, and a critical examination of how divorce cases are handled in India.

A Debate Long Overdue

Divorce proceedings in India are often grueling, emotionally draining, and financially exhausting.

For many, like Atul, they become a battle for survival, both literally and metaphorically. His tragic end has exposed the challenges faced by individuals—especially men—in navigating a legal system that can sometimes feel skewed.

Public opinion, largely siding with Atul, has been vocal about the potential misuse of family courts and alimony laws. While some argue that his action reflects the unbearable pressures faced during divorce litigations, others believe it points to the urgent need for systemic reforms.

The Supreme Court’s Recent Guidelines on Alimony

In a separate but significant development, the Supreme Court of India has laid down eight factors to guide courts in determining alimony amounts. This framework is expected to provide much-needed clarity in cases where disputes over maintenance often turn contentious.

Here are the eight factors outlined by the Supreme Court:

• Status of the parties, social and financial: The court considers the financial and societal standing of both spouses.

• Reasonable needs of the wife and dependent children: This ensures that the basic needs of dependents are met.

• Parties’ individual qualifications and employment statuses: Whether one or both spouses are employed significantly influences the decision.

• Independent income or assets owned by the applicant: The financial self-sufficiency of the applicant plays a role.

• Standard of life enjoyed by the wife in the matrimonial home: The aim is to maintain a comparable lifestyle post-divorce.

• Any employment sacrifices made for family responsibilities: The court considers sacrifices made, especially by the spouse who stayed home to care for the family.

• Reasonable litigation costs for a non-working wife: This accounts for the financial strain of legal battles.

• Financial capacity of the husband: His income, liabilities, and maintenance obligations are carefully evaluated.

Guidelines, Not a Rigid Formula

The Supreme Court clarified that these are merely guidelines, not an inflexible framework. Each case is unique, and the courts must adapt their judgments to the specifics of the situation.

The 20-Year Alimony Battle. A Banker’s Long Journey Through the Courts

The recent Supreme Court verdict in a 20-year-long alimony case involving a Dubai-based banker has shed light on the complexities of divorce and maintenance laws in India.

This protracted legal battle began in 2004 when the banker filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty, only to face a counter-petition from his wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for alimony. What followed was a two-decade-long legal odyssey spanning the family court, high court, and finally, the Supreme Court.

A Legal Tug-of-War

The banker, now a CEO in Dubai, initially complied with every court ruling regarding alimony. In 2015, he even voluntarily increased the amount. However, the situation escalated when his wife demanded an even higher sum, citing her own and their son’s needs.

The contention revolved around Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which, according to the banker’s lawyers, does not permit maintenance for an adult male child.

This legal gray area turned into a full-fledged battle when the wife challenged the interpretation of Section 26, seeking permanent alimony for herself and their adult son, who had just completed a B.Tech degree at the time.

Supreme Court’s Verdict

The case culminated in a landmark decision by the Supreme Court, where Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B. Varale analyzed the details and delivered a nuanced judgment.

Here’s what the court ruled –

For the Wife: A one-time settlement of ₹5 crore was deemed just and reasonable, taking into account her status as a homemaker, the prolonged separation, and the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage. The court emphasized that alimony should ensure a decent standard of living for the wife without penalizing the husband.

For the Son: While the son was now a major and had completed his engineering degree, the court acknowledged that securing gainful employment in today’s competitive world often requires further education or professional qualifications. Thus, an additional ₹1 crore was awarded for the son’s higher education and financial security until he becomes self-reliant.

The Supreme Court stressed that the guidelines for determining alimony are not rigid but adaptable to the specifics of each case. It also recognized the father’s financial capacity and legal obligation to support his family while ensuring the settlement amount was fair to all parties involved.

Law on Permanent Alimony, A Silent Yet Complicated Space
The recent Supreme Court ruling in a long-standing alimony case has reignited debates about the lack of clarity in India’s laws on permanent maintenance. While the law provides guidance on factors to consider, it remains silent on defining permanent alimony in a comprehensive manner.

This ambiguity often leaves room for subjective interpretations, resulting in prolonged legal battles, as seen in this 20-year-long case.

The Apex Court’s Perspective
The Supreme Court made it clear that there cannot be strict guidelines or a fixed formula for determining permanent maintenance. Instead, each case must be assessed on its unique merits. The Court outlined several factors that should guide decisions on alimony:

Income: The financial status of both parties plays a pivotal role.

Conduct: The behavior of both individuals during the marriage is considered.

Capacity and Responsibility: Each party’s ability to maintain their dependents is assessed.

Standard of Living: The quality of life enjoyed by the wife during the marriage is crucial.

Other Factors: Circumstances like health, employment sacrifices, and financial obligations are also taken into account.

Delhi High Court Advocate Meenal Duggal aptly summarized the Supreme Court’s stance, saying, “The father’s obligation does not end when the child reaches the age of majority, especially if the child is still studying. This case establishes a balance between a father’s financial responsibilities and the alimony that must be granted.”

A Two-Decade Legal Odyssey

Despite these considerations, this particular illustrates the inefficiencies of the judicial process. A family court case—not a criminal one—has dragged on for nearly 20 years. The son, who was a minor when the case began, is now an adult. An entire generation has passed before the case reached its conclusion.

This delay raises critical questions –

Why has the case taken so long?

The Indian judicial system is notoriously overburdened, with a staggering backlog of cases. However, the time taken to resolve a family dispute like this one reflects systemic inefficiencies that demand urgent attention.

Financial Toll: The prolonged proceedings have likely drained both parties financially, with substantial amounts spent on legal fees over the years.

Emotional Impact: Beyond the financial cost, the emotional toll on all involved—husband, wife, and child—is immeasurable.

A Broader Judicial Concern

If a family court case can languish for two decades, what does this say about the state of criminal cases in India?
Family disputes, while complex, do not involve the same level of investigation and evidence gathering as criminal cases. Yet, the judicial system struggles to resolve them efficiently. This delay erodes trust in the judiciary and underscores the urgent need for reform.

Its Time for Systemic Change

The Supreme Court’s observations on permanent alimony provide valuable guidance for future cases. However, the broader issue lies in the system’s inability to deliver timely justice. Solutions like introducing mediation as a mandatory step, setting time limits for family court cases, and increasing the number of family court judges could significantly reduce delays.

This case shows the challenges of India’s divorce and alimony laws, particularly when disputes over maintenance spiral into lengthy legal battles. The emotional and financial toll on both parties is undeniable, as is the strain on the judicial system.

As society evolves, so must the legal framework governing marriage and divorce.

For the banker and his family, the judgment brings closure to a two-decade-long ordeal, but it also leaves a broader question for the judiciary and lawmakers – How can we make justice swifter and more equitable for all?

Sadly, for Atul Subhash the system did not give him a chance.