Homemaker's Work Has Economic Value, Cannot Be Called Idleness: Delhi High Court

In a significant ruling that reframes how Indian courts view the economic contribution of homemakers, the Delhi High Court on Monday held that dismissing a non-earning spouse as "idle" reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of domestic labour — and that the law must recognise the real value of work done within the home.

The observation came while Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was hearing a maintenance petition filed by an estranged wife under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. A magisterial court had previously denied her interim maintenance on the grounds that she was able-bodied and well-educated but had chosen not to seek employment. The High Court overturned that reasoning, finding it legally and morally flawed.

Justice Sharma drew a clear and emphatic distinction between the capacity to earn and actual earnings — holding that the mere ability to work cannot be used to deny a woman her legal entitlement to maintenance.

"The assumption that a non-earning spouse is 'idle' reflects a misunderstanding of domestic contributions," the court said. "To describe non-employment as idleness is easy; to recognise the labour involved in sustaining a household is far more difficult."

The court went further, explicitly cataloguing what domestic work entails — running a household, raising children, providing family support, and restructuring one's own life around a spouse's career and transfers. "These tasks are unpaid and often unrecognised, and they do not show up in bank statements or taxable income. Yet, they form the invisible framework that keeps many families going," the court observed.

The judgment also addressed a pattern the court said it had observed in matrimonial disputes — where well-qualified wives are denied maintenance on the argument that they voluntarily chose not to work. Justice Sharma acknowledged that in Indian society, women are still frequently expected to leave employment after marriage, and that a woman who steps away from her profession for marriage or family cannot realistically be expected to re-enter it later at the same level, salary, or standing.

Finding no evidence of any past or current employment or income on the part of the petitioner, the court awarded her Rs 50,000 in maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act.