The Allahabad High Court ruled that a woman cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC if she lives with another partner while her first marriage remains legally valid. Long-term cohabitation does not grant legal spousal status.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a woman is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) from a partner with whom she lived, if her first marriage was still legally subsisting.
The ruling came while dismissing a revision petition filed by a woman challenging a district court order that had earlier refused her maintenance claim.
A bench of Justice Madan Pal Singh observed that even if a marriage ceremony was performed with the second partner, such a marriage would be void in law if the woman’s previous marriage had not been legally dissolved.
“Even assuming a marriage ceremony was performed, the same would be void as the applicant’s earlier marital tie continued to subsist. Thus, she cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC based on a long-standing relationship,”
the court stated.
The court clarified that long-term cohabitation, even for nearly a decade, does not automatically confer the legal status of a wife under Section 125 CrPC if the relationship lacks legal validity.
“Although the revisionist resided with the opposite party for nearly 10 years and the relationship may appear akin to marriage, such cohabitation does not confer the legal status of a wife under Section 125 CrPC,”
the judgment said.
Justice Singh further cautioned that allowing maintenance claims in such circumstances would dilute the sanctity of marriage and undermine the purpose of Section 125 CrPC.
“If such a practice is permitted in society, where a woman continues to remain legally married to one man yet resides with another without dissolution of the first marriage, the very object and sanctity of Section 125 CrPC would stand diluted,”
the court observed.
During the hearing, the woman’s counsel argued that she was socially acknowledged as the man’s spouse and that her name appeared as his wife in official documents such as the Aadhaar card and passport.
It was also submitted that the man and his sons allegedly subjected her to cruelty and harassment, eventually deserting her in March 2018, forcing her to seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
Rejecting these arguments, the High Court held that official documentation or social recognition cannot override legal requirements under matrimonial law.
In its judgment dated December 8, the court concluded:
“The revisionist does not fall within the ambit of a legally wedded wife for the purpose of Section 125 CrPC and therefore, her maintenance application was rightly rejected.”
Click Here to Read More Reports on Maintenance