“High Court Recognizes Cohabitation as Basis for Presumed Marriage, Adjusts Maintenance in Landmark Ruling”

Share:
laws bail money dowry jurisdiction Fails CallsEvidence 2 125 Dowry bankEyewitness matrimonial cheque Employees Evidence Man maintenance guilty bailable system Marriage power Perversity relationship police

In a landmark judgment, the High Court of Jharkhand, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary, upheld the presumption of marriage in a maintenance case under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., while revising the maintenance amount to Rs. 3000 per month. The case, Cr. Revision No.946 of 2022, involved petitioner Ram Kumar Ravi and the opposing parties, the State of Jharkhand and Nayana Kumari.

The original order, dated 20.05.2022, by the Additional Principal Judge-II, Family Court, Ranchi, had directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 5000 per month to Nayana Kumari, who claimed to be his wife. The petitioner challenged this order, denying the legal validity of their marriage and contesting the quantum of maintenance awarded.

Justice Choudhary, in his order dated 12.01.2024, emphasized the concept of presumed marriage under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. “If the parties live together as husband and wife, a presumption of marriage can be drawn,” the judgment stated, aligning with precedents in Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014) and Dwarika Prasad Satpathy v. Bidyut Prava Dixit (1999).

The court noted conflicting testimonies and evidence regarding the couple’s marital status. However, it highlighted that the petitioner’s shifting defense and lack of consistent material to rebut the presumption of marriage played a crucial role in its decision. “There is no consistent case, far less any cogent evidence, regarding the previous marriage of the applicant,” the court observed, thereby rejecting the plea that Nayana Kumari was not married to the petitioner.

Regarding the quantum of maintenance, the court undertook a reassessment of the petitioner’s income. Considering his handicapped status and the ambiguous details of his earnings, the court estimated his income to be in the range of Rs 10,000-12,000 per month. Consequently, the maintenance amount was reduced from Rs. 5000 to Rs. 3000 per month.

This judgment has significant implications for maintenance cases under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., particularly in situations where the legal status of a marriage is in question. The court’s approach in this case reflects a broader understanding of marital relationships and the responsibilities therein, beyond the confines of strict legal definitions.

Date of Decision-12.01.2024

ABC VS The State of Jharkhand

Download Judgment

Share: