A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma upheld the plea of a woman against a 2017 High Court ruling. The High Court had denied her maintenance on the grounds that her first marriage was legally subsisting. However, it had allowed maintenance for the daughter born from her second marriage.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India ruled that a woman is entitled to claim maintenance from her second husband under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), even if her first marriage is legally still valid.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma upheld the plea of a woman against a 2017 High Court ruling. The High Court had denied her maintenance on the grounds that her first marriage was legally subsisting. However, it had allowed maintenance for the daughter born from her second marriage.
While examining the plea, the Supreme Court emphasized that the right to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is not merely a benefit but a duty that a husband must fulfill towards his wife.
The bench stated “In the opinion of this court, when the social justice objective of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is considered against the particular facts and circumstances of this case, we cannot, in good conscience, deny maintenance to appellant number one.”
The court highlighted that laws meant for social welfare should be interpreted in a broad and beneficial manner. The judges noted that denying maintenance in such cases would lead to poverty and destitution, defeating the very purpose of the law. Additionally, it would allow the respondent man to enjoy the privileges of marriage while evading his responsibilities.
ALSO READ: Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules Wife Involved in Adultery Can Be Denied Maintenance
“The only conceivable mischief that could arise in permitting a beneficial interpretation is that the appellant-woman could claim dual maintenance–however, that is not the case under the present facts.”
Background
The woman in question was first married in 1999 in Hyderabad. She had a male child in 2000. After returning from the USA in 2005, she and her first husband started living separately. They formally dissolved their marriage through a memorandum of understanding on November 25, 2011.
Soon after, on November 27, 2011, she married her neighbor, the respondent man. However, their marriage quickly faced troubles, and the respondent approached the Family Court, which declared the marriage null and void on February 1, 2006.
Surprisingly, on February 14, 2006, the woman remarried the same man. They had a daughter on January 28, 2008. But conflicts again arose, leading the woman to file an FIR against her husband and his family, alleging dowry harassment. She then sought maintenance for herself and her daughter.
ALSO READ: BREAKING | “Divorced Muslim Woman can Claim Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC”: SC
In 2012, the Family Court ruled in her favor and granted her Rs 5000 per month and Rs 3500 for her daughter. However, the respondent challenged this in the High Court. The High Court ruled against her, stating that she could not claim maintenance as she was not a legally wedded wife.
Upon appealing to the Supreme Court, the apex court ruled in her favor, emphasizing the social justice principle behind maintenance laws.
The Supreme Court stressed that laws should be interpreted in a way that prevents financial hardship and protects the dignity of women. It pointed out that maintenance laws exist to ensure that no woman or child is left helpless due to marital disputes.
The court remarked “It is settled law that social welfare provisions must be subjected to an expansive and beneficial construction.”
Case Title: SMT. N. USHA RANI AND ANR. VERSUS MOODUDULA SRINIVAS
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
