It is the most ridiculous advice that any advocate can give a husband: To sell properties to protect them from wives or soon to be ex-wives. There is no law that gives properties to wives in any dispute whatsoever. By selling your properties or transferring them through gift deeds, you irreversibly alienate these assets and thereby create a third-front to fight yet another battle in the future to recover them. Any wife can, at most, get maintenance and right-to-residence in some property owned or rented by you or in which she and you once shared a household. Such right-to-residence is precisely that... a right to reside in some such property but not transfer of title to her name.
Even if there had been such a law that gave wives shares in properties, which there currently is not, even then any such transfer would be termed as a fraudulent transfer to avoid creditor rights because the wife would be deemed to be a creditor and such transfers would be reversible or at least preserve the right of the wife, if she had any.
The Transfer of Property Act has some section which covers about transfer of title of properties under litigation. The law as set by Supreme Court decisions state that if title to immovable properties under dispute is transferred during litigation then the rights of the parties in the litigation are protected notwithstanding the transfer of title. What that means is that let us say that Wife has a right and Husband sells the property during the litigation. Well, then the wife will have her rights preserved in the property and can assert her rights even after the sale deed is registered, in the event she prevails in the litigation.
The above discussion is moot because wives DO NOT have any right to title in any property. Of course, if the property stands on the name of the wife or if it can be proved that the wife contributed financially to the purchase of the property, then the above discussion does not hold true because the wife will have a direct or indirect right to the title of the property and can claim the same through civil litigation in a Family Court.
If husband defaults in payment of maintenance, then the Court can attach some of his assets. including immovable properties or income derived from the properties. From attachment to the Court ordering the actual sale of the property to satisfy maintenance obligations is a long process. Therefore, to transfer or sell properties to avoid this limited exposure is outright idiotic.
Disclaimer: I am not an advocate but welcome any comments from advocates which contradict my observations. Would be useful to others as this is a common concern among husbands.