- Woman entitled to maintenance despite void marriage due to concealment of husband's prior marriage
- Husband's revision petition challenging maintenance order was dismissed by Allahabad High Court
- Wife's plea for enhancement of Rs 6,000 monthly maintenance was partly allowed by the court
The Allahabad High Court has held that a woman who is induced into marriage by concealment of her husband's existing marriage is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even though the marriage between the parties is void.
The court was of the view that the husband cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong and deny maintenance to the woman who had entered into the marriage without knowledge of the subsisting earlier marriage.
Justice Garima Prashad, with the above observations, dismissed the revision petition filed by the husband challenging the family court's order granting maintenance to the wife. However, the court partly allowed the wife's revision seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount.
In her petition, the wife, Monika alias Satyawati, had sought enhancement of maintenance on the ground that the amount of Rs 6,000 per month awarded by the Mathura Family Court was wholly inadequate considering that the husband is a government servant and earns around Rs 50,000 per month.
The husband, Manoj Kumar alias Bablu, in his revision had contended that the application filed on behalf of the wife under Section 125 CrPC itself was not maintainable as the marriage between the parties was not a valid marriage in the eyes of law.
According to him, his earlier marriage was not dissolved on the date of the alleged marriage with the woman. In this case, the parties allegedly married on December 12, 2016. The husband's first marriage, solemnised on February 29, 2008, came to be dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent only on November 15, 2017. Thus, on the date of the alleged marriage, his earlier marriage admittedly subsisted.
The family court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, recorded a categorical finding that the marriage ceremonies between the parties had in fact been performed according to Hindu rites and customs.
It rejected the husband's plea that the marriage had been solemnised forcibly at gunpoint and further found that he had concealed the fact of his subsisting marriage from the woman who had entered into the matrimonial relationship without knowledge of his existing marriage.
The High Court, in its judgment dated July 16, held that where a woman is induced into marriage by concealment of the husband's existing marriage, a beneficial and purposive interpretation of Section 125 CrPC is required to prevent exploitation and destitution.
Justice Prashad rejected the husband's contention that the woman could not be granted maintenance merely because the marriage was void. Hence, the court found no illegality in the family court's finding that the husband had fraudulently concealed his subsisting marriage and that the woman had no knowledge of it.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
