The Husband’s Lawyer:

What they did not teach you

about Divorce in Law School
 INDEX
Page No.

1. The Loving Husband Trap

Why saying “I want my wife back” is a legal blunder —
03 - 06
and how courts reward strategy, not sincerity.

2. The Maintenance Surrender

How premature generosity destroys your bargaining power 07 - 10
— and why you must contest every rupee for your client.

3. The Bail Reflex

How premature generosity destroys your bargaining power 11 - 15
— and why you must contest every rupee for your client.

4. The Passive Defense Problem

Why filing only divorce or RCR is a mistake — and how 16 - 19
civil/criminal counter-cases can flip the narrative.

5. The Perjury Blindspot

How false affidavits quietly destroy your client’s case —
and why filing a Section 340 CrPC (Section 379 BNSS)
20 - 23
application can change the game.

2
 Chapter 1:
The Loving Husband Mistake :
Why Good Intentions Don’t Win Cases

When I started practicing divorce law in India, I believed that

goodwill, humility, and honest intentions were virtues that courts
would reward. One of my earliest assumptions—and most persistent
mistakes—was advising husbands to say in court that they still loved
their wives, that they didn’t want a divorce, and that they hoped for
reconciliation. I used to think it showed sincerity. I now realize it
showed weakness.
In courtrooms across the country, I’ve seen this line repeated by
hundreds of husbands: “My Lord, I don’t want to separate. I still want
her back.”
But here’s the brutal truth: saying this gives your client no legal
advantage. None.
The courts are not going to see your client as a noble, sacrificial
husband. They’re not going to rebuke the wife for refusing to return.
They’re not going to deny her maintenance or residence orders
because your client wants to make the marriage work. In fact, in
many cases, judges will say something along the lines of: “If you still
want her back, then support her financially until she decides.”

And while your client is saying he wants her back, she’s:

Seeking interim maintenance
Asking for residence orders under the DV Act
Filing FIRs under 498A, 406, and sometimes even 377 or 313

You are playing defense. She is playing offense.

3
 Why This Mistake Happens

Most men who say they want their wife back don’t actually mean
they want reconciliation at all costs. What they’re really saying is, “I
want to avoid conflict. I don’t want to look like the villain. I’m scared of
the legal consequences.”

But courts don’t operate on feelings. They operate on facts and

strategy. And this approach weakens both.
In fact, if the wife wants to harm the husband, she still can. She
doesn’t need his cooperation. She has the law. She has the narrative.
And if she’s angry or being manipulated by others, she will weaponize
both.

I’ve seen it again and again—men who are devastated when they
read the complaint filed by their wife. They can’t believe what’s
written there. “She said I raped her?” “She said my father molested
her?” “She said we beat her until she miscarried?”
And yet, despite these allegations, they still tell the judge: “I want to
bring her back.”

It’s tragic. And it’s pointless.

How Courts React to This Statement

What most husbands don’t realize is that this statement can

boomerang in court. Judges are overworked and under pressure. If a
husband says “I want her back,” a judge hears: “I won’t contest her
demands.”
This statement becomes the perfect setup for three things:

a. Interim maintenance.
b. Residence orders.
c. A narrative of emotional manipulation — where the wife says:
“He’s pretending in court but torturing me at home.”

4
 And suddenly, the court believes the wife more, because your
client publicly declared affection while she’s alleging cruelty. The
contradiction hurts your client.

What Should Be Done Instead

When your client is falsely accused, your first instinct may be to de-
escalate. That’s understandable. But never confuse passivity with
strategy.

Here’s what I now advise clients in similar situations:

If you want reconciliation, pursue it through formal court

mediation — not through weak verbal statements.
Never say “I want her back” in your written reply unless it serves a
clear legal or tactical purpose.
Focus on evidence. Prove your innocence. Build your defense.
If you want peace, negotiate from strength, not emotional
vulnerability.

Even if in his heart, the client still wants the marriage to work,
showing submission in court is a tactical error.

If the wife is being aggressive and manipulative, she does not

interpret kindness as virtue. She interprets it as fear.

How This Mistake Costs Your Client

This mistake, in practice, leads to:

Judges believing you are willing to pay maintenance — which

increases the amounts awarded.
Police and CAW cells seeing you as someone who can be
pressured.
Wife’s lawyers becoming more aggressive.
Delay in filing your own cases — thinking “maybe things will settle.”
5
In one case, a husband said in court that he loved his wife and
wanted her back. The very next hearing, his wife filed for interim
maintenance and sought a residence order. When we opposed the
application, the judge said: “But your client wants her back. Why is he
opposing maintenance now?”

His own words were used against him.

Another man, faced with the same situation, followed our advice and
said nothing emotional in court. Instead, we contested every
allegation, submitted his proof, and filed a perjury application. The
wife, seeing she wasn’t getting the easy win she expected, agreed to
a mutual divorce at half the alimony she was initially demanding.

Final Thoughts
In divorce litigation, your client’s emotional truth doesn’t matter if it’s
not backed by legal action. And sometimes, it actively harms your
legal position.

So if you have a husband client facing false allegations:

Don’t say “I want her back” unless you have a strategy.

Don’t think kindness will be rewarded.
Don’t make decisions based on shame, fear, or guilt.

Litigation is not therapy. It is war. And in war, every statement matters.

This was the first—and perhaps the most common—mistake I made

as a divorce lawyer. I now make sure no client of mine walks into
court hoping to be seen as “the nice guy.” Because the nice guy, in
most Indian courts, finishes last.

And if your client must act like the nice guy, do it smartly — through
evidence, timing, and leverage — not through desperation.

6
 Chapter 2
The Maintenance Surrender – How Premature
Generosity Destroys Your Bargaining Power

Many husbands enter courtrooms believing that if they show how

noble, generous, or ‘reasonable’ they are, the system will reward
them. They think saying “I want my wife back” or “I am happy to
provide for her” will earn them moral points in court. But in practice,
nothing could be further from the truth.

This tendency to surrender at the first opportunity — especially

financially — often becomes the husband’s biggest liability in
matrimonial litigation.

The Illusion of Goodwill

One of the first mistakes most husbands make is this: they say they’re
happy to pay interim maintenance to show that they’re responsible
men.

Some even go a step further. They start offering generous monthly

sums — sometimes even before the wife has filed a maintenance
claim. They believe this will prevent the wife from filing more cases.
They assume this gesture will create goodwill and fast-track a
settlement.

But in reality, this behavior signals weakness, not strength.

Once the wife and her legal team see that your client and you are
willing to give without a fight, they will demand more. In their eyes,
your client has money. You are afraid of court. You can be pressured.

7
And then the wife starts pushing for lump-sums. For property. For
permanent alimony. She starts dragging the case on — because
now, every month that passes, she earns without working. There is
zero incentive for her to settle.

Why Maintenance Must Be Contested

Contesting maintenance is not about being stingy. It’s about

strategy.

You must fight tooth and nail for every rupee — because every rupee
you give sets a precedent. If you agree to ₹30,000 today, the court
may assume your client can easily pay ₹50,000 tomorrow.

More importantly, when you contest maintenance, you force the wife
to show proof:

Proof that she has no income

Proof of her expenses
Proof of your earnings

And once this burden shifts to her, many women are exposed. They
hide income. They exaggerate expenses. They fail to file proper
affidavits.

This gives your client leverage — not just in the current case, but in all
negotiations and settlements.

Document Everything, Pay Nothing in Cash

If the court does order some interim amount, make sure every
payment is done via bank transfer. Never hand over cash. If you do, it
will never be acknowledged in court. The wife may say she never
received anything.
8
Also, ensure that you only pay what is ordered by the court. Do not
make voluntary payments beyond that. Courts are not impressed by
generosity. They work on documents and precedent, not emotions.

Delay Is Your Ally

Yes, you read that right.

In many cases, delay helps your husband client. While the wife wants
interim maintenance quickly, you can — through legal arguments,
perjury applications, and procedural objections — stretch the
process.

The more you delay the order, the more time you have to gather
evidence, file perjury for false affidavits, or even move higher courts
for relief.

In some cases, husbands have successfully stalled interim

maintenance for over 4 years, saving lakhs in the process and
strengthening their hand in final settlement talks.

Real Case: The ₹30 Lakh Cut

A client of mine once agreed, too early, to pay ₹40,000/month as

interim maintenance. He was earning ₹1.5 lakhs, but also supporting
his elderly parents and repaying a home loan.
He started making payments immediately.

Six months later, the wife filed for enhancement. She claimed he had
hidden his income. She wanted ₹75,000/month. At this point, he
approached me. We filed an application under Section 127 CrPC,
presented his liabilities, and challenged the wife’s false affidavit.
9
We also filed a perjury application under Section 340 CrPC for false
income declaration by the wife.

Soon after, the wife agreed to a lump sum settlement. From her
original demand of ₹45 lakhs, we negotiated down to ₹15 lakhs — a
₹30 lakh cut — primarily because we contested maintenance from
the start and exposed her lies.

Conclusion: Be Smart, Not Emotional

You may think paying maintenance is the noble thing to do. That it
will win your client goodwill. That it will make the case end faster.

But matrimonial litigation is not a test of character — it’s a game of

leverage. The less your client will contest, the more you surrender.
And every rupee you pay too soon becomes the baseline for all
future demands.

So be cautious. Be calculated. And remember — generosity, when

misplaced, is not virtue. It’s surrender.

In the next chapter, we’ll explore how the panic-driven race for
anticipatory bail can actually harm your case more than help it.

10
 Chapter 3
The Bail Reflex – Why Rushing for
Anticipatory Bail Can Backfire

Most husbands, when faced with an FIR in a matrimonial dispute, do

one thing immediately — they run to file for anticipatory bail. This is
what I call the bail reflex. It’s instinctive. It’s emotional. And in many
cases, it’s a strategic blunder.

The Panic Button

When a wife files an FIR — often under sections like 498A, 406, or 377
IPC — the immediate fear that grips the husband is arrest. This fear is
so deep, so primal, that he believes the only way to stay out of jail is
to apply for anticipatory bail right away.

We lawyers, too, feed this fear. We say: “Apply immediately. If you

don’t, you might be arrested tomorrow.”

And yes — arrests do happen. But what most people don’t realize is
that the process of getting anticipatory bail itself can make things
worse — if it is done without first understanding the ground reality.

11
 When the Judge Says No

Here’s the problem: once you file for anticipatory bail and it gets
rejected — your situation becomes much worse.

The Investigating Officer (IO), who might have had no intention of

arresting you, now has no choice. Since the Sessions Court or High
Court has refused bail, the IO is now under pressure to arrest you
and show that he is doing his job.

The rejection of anticipatory bail becomes a trigger for arrest.

A Better Strategy: Send Your Lawyer First

Here’s what we do now — and what you must also advise every
client:

Never go to the police station directly.

Send your experienced criminal lawyer first. Let him talk to the IO. Let
him assess the mood, the intention, and the file. The lawyer’s job is to
ask one simple question:

“Do you intend to arrest my client?”

In many cases, the IO says no. Especially in metropolitan cities, after

the Supreme Court’s directions in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar,
most officers know they cannot arrest casually.

If the lawyer gets verbal assurance — and if the IO is cooperative —

then the client can appear, join the investigation, and avoid jail
altogether.

12
 But What If There Is a Risk?

If the lawyer comes back and says:

“The IO is being non-committal.”

“He says ‘come to the station and we’ll see.’”
“He says he will arrest.”
Then yes — apply for anticipatory bail immediately.

But now you are applying based on a risk assessment, not panic.
Also, in your bail application, you can now mention:

That your lawyer already contacted the IO.

That you are willing to cooperate.
That the IO has an ill motive to arrest.

This paints a picture of a reasonable man seeking protection — not

a guilty man running from the law.

Don’t Waste Your First Shot

Remember, anticipatory bail is discretionary. There is no

guarantee. And in the first hearing itself, if the judge says:

“I don’t think this is a case for bail,”

You’ve lost your biggest protection. The next time you apply, it
becomes harder. You now have to show a change in
circumstances.

Which is why timing is everything.

13
 Real Case: Avoiding Jail Without Bail

One of my clients, a tech professional, was falsely accused under

Sections 498A and 377. His instinct — like everyone’s — was to file
for bail the next morning.

Instead, I sent a senior criminal lawyer from my team to the police

station. He spoke to the IO, reviewed the file, and reported:

“They have no plan to arrest. The wife has only given a vague
complaint. No dowry list, no medical report, no evidence.”

We waited. The client was called once to the police station. He

joined the investigation. The IO recorded his statement and let him
go.

No arrest. No bail needed.

Had we gone for anticipatory bail and been rejected, the client
would likely have been arrested immediately.

Use Every Tool, But Use It Right

Anticipatory bail is a crucial legal right. But like any weapon, it

must be used wisely.

Don’t treat it as your first step for the client. Treat it as your fallback
— only if you cannot get informal assurance from the police.

The lawyer going to do groundwork saves your client money, saves

client the risk of arrest, and saves your client the embarrassment
of a rejected bail application.

14
 Conclusion: Replace Panic With Strategy

FIRs are scary. But fear is not strategy. And when your client is
caught in a false case, your greatest strength is your mind — not
your panic.

The husband who applies for anticipatory bail without knowing the
IO’s position is like a soldier firing blindly in the dark. Sometimes it
hits, often it backfires.

So breathe. Wait. Meet with the I.O. Understand the ground reality.
And then decide.

In the next chapter, we’ll talk about why filing only for divorce or
restitution is not enough — and why husbands must go on legal
offense if they want a fighting chance.

15
 Chapter 4:
The Passive Defense Problem – Why
Filing Only Divorce or RCR Is a Mistake

One of the most common — and most damaging — strategic errors

husbands and their lawyers make in matrimonial litigation is filing
only for divorce or restitution of conjugal rights (RCR) in response to a
wife’s legal attack. This reactive, passive approach leaves the
husband completely exposed. Filing divorce or RCR is not a defense. It
is a plea. And it does nothing to prevent or counter the avalanche of
legal weapons that the wife is often about to unleash.

The Illusion of Action

When a man walks into a lawyer’s chamber and says, “My wife left
the house — what should I do?” the standard reply from most lawyers
is, “File for divorce” or “File for restitution.”

It sounds like action. But it’s not strategy.

The husband leaves the courtroom thinking he’s made the first move.
But in reality, he’s already playing catch-up — because the wife has
options that are far more aggressive:

A 498A FIR for dowry harassment

A domestic violence complaint
A Section 125 CrPC petition for maintenance
Custody cases
Residence orders
Even police complaints for unnatural sex, molestation, or assault

16
 Your divorce petition? It becomes background noise in comparison.
No judge will stop the wife’s aggressive petitions just because you
filed for divorce on behalf of your client. In fact, your client will be
forced to pay her maintenance/alimony even in your own divorce
case.

Why Divorce Petitions Help Her More Than You

Filing a divorce petition gives the wife several procedural

advantages:

She can file an application for interim maintenance under Section

24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
She can claim litigation expenses.
She can claim alimony.

Similarly, RCR petitions are a complete waste of time. No one is going

to force an unwilling spouse to live with you again. In fact, most RCR
petitions are just precursors to maintenance orders in favor of the
wife.

The Alternative: Go On Offense

If your client is innocent and the wife has caused him mental,
physical, or emotional trauma — file his civil and criminal cases
against her and her family.

Civil Cases

Suit for damages: If the wife or her family members have caused
defamation, extortion, intimidation, harassment.

Injunctions: Prevent the wife from entering the marital home or

from making defamatory statements publicly or on social media.

17
Criminal Complaints

Section 200 CrPC private complaints: File a complaint directly

before the magistrate.

Sections 500, 506, 384 IPC: Defamation, criminal intimidation,

extortion.

These actions send a strong message: you’re not just defending —

you’re retaliating.

But What Do I File For?

This is where most husbands get stuck. “But I’m the innocent one.
What case can I file?”

Ask yourself:

Has your wife or her family ever threatened you?

Have they defamed you in front of relatives or at your workplace?
Have they extorted money or gifts?
Have they emotionally blackmailed or humiliated you?

If yes — that’s your cause of action.

Many husbands, once asked these questions, suddenly realize how

much abuse they’ve tolerated.

Real Case: From Passive Victim to Strategic

Offense
One client came to us after his wife filed multiple cases against him.
He had done nothing except file a divorce petition. He was paying
maintenance in two forums and had a warrant for non-appearance.

18
 We filed a civil suit for defamation and a criminal complaint against
the wife and her father. Within two months of summons being issued,
the wife’s tone changed. Her lawyers initiated a discussion for
settlement. The demand dropped by over 60%.

Filing Countersuits Changes the Negotiation

Why does this work?

It creates leverage.
It gives you bargaining power.
It shows the wife and her family that harassment comes with
consequences.
Most importantly, it gives you something to trade in negotiations.

If all you have is a divorce petition, you have nothing to trade.

Conclusion: Don’t Just Defend — Counterattack

In matrimonial disputes, the passive husband loses. Every. Single.

Time.

If you truly want to protect the client, his family, and his finances, stop
relying on weak petitions like divorce and RCR. Use the legal system
the way it was meant to be used — to assert rights, protect dignity of
the client, and fight back.

In the next chapter, we’ll talk about the power of Section 340 CrPC —
and how a simple perjury application can expose the wife’s lies and
shift the case in your client’s favor.

19
 Chapter 5:
The Perjury Blindspot – How False
Affidavits Quietly Destroy Your Case

One of the most underutilized tools in matrimonial litigation is Section

340 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which deals with perjury
— the act of lying under oath. Most husbands are not even aware
that their wives, while claiming maintenance, may be giving false
affidavits about their income, employment status, and assets. And
even when they are aware, many of us lawyers discourage taking
action, saying it won’t lead anywhere.

That mindset is a mistake. A costly one.

The Lie That Changes Everything

In nearly every matrimonial case where maintenance is sought, the

wife must submit an affidavit detailing her income, liabilities, and
assets. This affidavit is not just paperwork — it is a sworn statement. Any
false declaration is perjury. But most husbands never challenge it.

Why?

Because we lawyers think it’s not worth it. Courts often say, “We’ll
consider perjury at the end of the trial,” which may take years. So the lie
remains unchallenged. Meanwhile, your husband client continues to
pay interim maintenance based on a false affidavit.

This delay — and this inaction — quietly destroys your case.

20
 Rajnesh vs Neha: The Game-Changer

In the landmark Supreme Court judgment Rajnesh vs Neha, the Court

laid down clear guidelines:

Both husband and wife must file detailed income affidavits.

If either party gives false information or withholds material facts, it
can amount to perjury.
Courts must ensure compliance at the very outset.

Despite these directions, most wives either do not file complete

affidavits or give blatantly false information. They declare they are
unemployed when they are not. They hide bank accounts. They claim
to have no income or inheritance. And they get away with it — unless
you act.

When We Started Filing Perjury Petitions

Initially, we too hesitated. We believed, like most lawyers, that perjury

petitions were futile. But about 3 years ago, we changed our approach.
We started filing Section 340 CrPC applications immediately after
spotting false affidavits.

But here’s the twist — we didn’t wait till the end of the trial. We filed our
applications before the court ruled on interim maintenance.

We asked the court to hold a preliminary inquiry under Section 340. We

highlighted the discrepancies. In many cases, we got favorable
responses:

Courts issued notice to the wife.

Replies were sought.
Interim maintenance was reconsidered more critically.

21
Even when perjury proceedings weren’t formally initiated, the mere
act of filing the application shifted the court’s attention. Judges
started questioning the wife’s claims more rigorously.

The Psychology of Perjury

The wife and her lawyers assume the husband won’t challenge the
affidavit. That’s part of their strategy.

But when a perjury petition is filed:

The wife is forced to respond.

She is forced to explain her omissions or lies.
Her credibility takes a hit — not just in that court, but across all
pending litigation.

This single move can completely change the negotiation dynamic.

Real Case: The Lying Lecturer

A husband came to us saying his wife claimed she was unemployed

and living off her parents. He had WhatsApp chats and photos showing
her taking online classes, issuing invoices, and even advertising tuition
batches on Instagram.

We filed a perjury petition under Section 340 CrPC and submitted the
evidence.

The court issued notice. The wife was visibly shaken. Instead of
continuing the maintenance fight, they offered a lump-sum settlement
at less than half their original demand.

Why? Because they knew that if the court ordered a preliminary inquiry
and found her guilty of lying, all her other claims would fall apart.

22
 Key Tips for Filing Section 340 Applications

Collect evidence: Screenshots, bank statements, employment

records, social media posts.

Highlight discrepancies clearly: Show the gap between her

affidavit and the actual evidence.

File before the interim maintenance order is passed: Timing

matters.
Use the Rajnesh vs Neha judgment: Quote it liberally.

Push for a preliminary inquiry: Even if the court doesn’t proceed

with perjury charges, the inquiry itself can protect you from inflated
maintenance.

Conclusion: Don’t Let Lies Decide Your Future

False affidavits are not just unethical — they’re strategic weapons

designed to extract more money from your husband client.

But if you take action early, file a strong perjury application under
Section 340 CrPC, and back it with hard evidence, you can shift the
balance of power in your client’s favor. You show the court that you are
serious, strategic, and unwilling to let your client be a silent victim.

This is not just about catching a lie. It’s about restoring credibility to
your side of the case.

23