{"id":383824,"date":"2026-05-12T11:00:42","date_gmt":"2026-05-12T05:30:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=383824"},"modified":"2026-05-12T09:59:13","modified_gmt":"2026-05-12T04:29:13","slug":"jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/","title":{"rendered":"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Jharkhand High Court:<\/span> The Division Bench of Sujit Narayan Prasad, Sanjay Prasad, JJ. upheld the decision of Family Court in dissolving the marriage solemnised in between the parties with a direction to pay a sum of ₹6 lakhs as alimony, considering the strong evidence proving cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a<\/span>)<\/a>, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a> (HMA, 1955).<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The respondent-plaintiff was married to the appellant-defendant as per Hindu Rites and Customs on 23 April 2021. After marriage she happily went to her matrimonial home. But, soon she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty and treated like a maid. She stated that at the time of marriage her parents had paid a sum of ₹8,00,000 in cash along with jewellery, furniture, and household articles worth approximately ₹10,00,000 to the appellant-husband and his family members.<\/p>\n

She deposed that upon being ousted from her matrimonial home, she took up employment as a teacher in a private school, but was compelled to leave due to threats from the appellant. Consequently, she filed a case before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) in Dhanbad. In that proceeding, the appellant was granted bail, on the basis of a compromise, wherein he undertook not to abuse or assault her and to consent to divorce by mutual agreement. Despite this, when she returned to her matrimonial home, the appellant resumed his acts of cruelty. She remained there for six months, during which she conceived, but owing to merciless assaults her pregnancy was terminated. Ultimately, on 21 May 2024, she was banished from the matrimonial house.<\/p>\n

She further alleged that the appellant is a cruel man, a habitual drunkard, a money-lender and habitually cohabits with his sister-in-law. She categorically stated that there is no possibility of reunion. The plaintiff then filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before the Family Court under Section 13(1)(i-a<\/span>)<\/a> HMA, 1955<\/a>. The Family Judge after appreciating the evidences and submission made in the pleading, allowed the suit by dissolving the marriage between the parties under Section 13(1)(i-a)<\/a> HMA, 1955<\/a> with a direction to pay a sum of ₹6 lakhs to the respondent-plaintiff as alimony.<\/p>\n

In contrast to the allegations, appellant-defendant contended that the evidences adduced on behalf of the appellant-defendant has not properly been considered and as such, the judgment impugned is perverse, hence, not sustainable in the eyes of law. He further submitted that the learned Family Court has not tried to reconcile the matter as the appellant-defendant was willing to reconcile, which was disregarded contrary to the spirit of Section 23(2)<\/a> HMA, 1955<\/a>. It has also been submitted that while granting the alimony of ₹6 lakhs the Family Court has not taken into consideration the financial independency of the respondent-plaintiff and her income as has been admitted by her that she is working as a teacher.<\/p>\n

Decision and Analysis<\/h3>\n

The Court after examining the evidences and submissions made by parties in their support, found it evident from the impugned judgment that the testimony of the respondent-plaintiff-wife was consistent and detailed, narrating specific incidents of cruelty, dowry demand, confinement and assault. The allegations of illicit relationship, physical violence, and termination of pregnancy owing to assault are grave in nature. The compromise entered into before the learned JMFC, Dhanbad, and the appellant’s subsequent conduct in resuming cruelty, further corroborates her assertion that the matrimonial bond has broken down.<\/p>\n

The Court held that the respondent-wife has successfully established her case of cruelty and dowry demand and failed compromise. The Court, based upon the aforesaid discussions on the issue of cruelty was of considered view that the appellant-petitioner has failed to establish the element of perversity in the aforesaid finding of the Family Court.<\/p>\n

The Court further held that the concept of permanent alimony as provided under Section 25 have been enacted with the object of removing the hardship of the wife or the husband with no independent income sufficient for living or meeting litigant expenses.<\/p>\n

The Court emphasised that there is a discretion conferred on the Court by sub-section (3) of Section 25<\/a> HMA, 1955<\/a> of declining to rescind, vary or modify the order under sub-section (1) of Section 25 thereof, even if on an application made by the husband\/wife, it is established that the husband\/wife has not remained chaste after the decree of maintenance is passed under sub section (1) of Section 25.<\/p>\n

The Court reiterated the judgment of a case U. Sree v. U. Srinivas<\/span>, (2013) 2 SCC 114<\/a>, by the Supreme Court observing that no arithmetic formula can be adopted for grant of permanent alimony to wife. However, status of the parties, their respective social needs, financial capacity of husband and other obligations must be taken into account. The Court while mentioning the judgment of the case Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel<\/span>, (2024) 13 SCC 66<\/a> reiterated that mere earning of some income by the wife cannot, by itself, be a ground to reject or reduce her claim for maintenance.<\/p>\n

The Court after considering the material available on record, dismissed the instant appeal and upheld the decree passed by the Principal Judge of the Family Court, Dhanbad, dissolving the marriage solemnised between the parties in the light of Section 13(1)(i-a<\/span>)<\/a> HMA, 1955<\/a> with a direction upon the appellant-defendant to pay a sum of ₹6 lakhs to the respondent-plaintiff as alimony.<\/p>\n

[Rahul Kumar<\/span> v. Deepika Gupta<\/span>, F.A. No. 233 of 2025, decided 4-5-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For the Appellant:<\/span> Shadab Ansari, Advocate<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span>Fahad Allam, Shadab Alam, S. Tabej, Advocates<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“A wife’s income or employment does not automatically disqualify her from receiving alimony, it is not an absolute rule. Courts determine maintenance based on the wife’s actual need compared to the lifestyle she enjoyed in her matrimonial home.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":383832,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[16391,2711,2570,2855,28744,5791,76456,2863,2644,104061,104063,104062],"class_list":["post-383824","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-alimony","tag-compromise","tag-Cruelty","tag-Dowry","tag-employment","tag-jharkhand-high-court","tag-justice-sujit-narayan-prasad","tag-maintenance","tag-pregnancy","tag-section-131i-a-of-the-hindu-marriage-act-1955","tag-section-232-of-hma-1955","tag-section-25-of-hma-1955"],"yoast_head":"\nWife's Employment No Bar to Alimony: Jharkhand HC | SCC Times| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":902,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"alimony\",\"compromise\",\"Cruelty\",\"Dowry\",\"employment\",\"Jharkhand High Court\",\"Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad\",\"maintenance\",\"pregnancy\",\"Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955\",\"Section 23(2) of HMA 1955\",\"Section 25 of HMA 1955\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/\",\"name\":\"Wife's Employment No Bar to Alimony: Jharkhand HC | SCC Times| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Cruelty Divorce Alimony Employment Pregnancy Compromise\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/12\\\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Wife's Employment No Bar to Alimony: Jharkhand HC | SCC Times| SCC Times","description":"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court","og_description":"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court","datePublished":"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/"},"wordCount":902,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp","keywords":["alimony","compromise","Cruelty","Dowry","employment","Jharkhand High Court","Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad","maintenance","pregnancy","Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955","Section 23(2) of HMA 1955","Section 25 of HMA 1955"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/","name":"Wife's Employment No Bar to Alimony: Jharkhand HC | SCC Times| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp","datePublished":"2026-05-12T05:30:42+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Jharkhand High Court upholds divorce decree and Rs 6 lakh alimony, holding that a wife's employment as a teacher does not automatically disentitle her from maintenance under Section 25, HMA, 1955.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Cruelty Divorce Alimony Employment Pregnancy Compromise"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/05\/12\/jharkhand-hc-employment-does-not-disqualify-her-from-receiving-alimony\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Employment Does Not Automatically Disqualify Wife from Receiving Alimony: Jharkhand HC Upheld the Decree by Family Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Cruelty-Divorce-Alimony-Employment-Pregnancy-Compromise.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/383824","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=383824"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/383824\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":383826,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/383824\/revisions\/383826"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/383832"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=383824"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=383824"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=383824"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}