Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay High Court

Compromise in Sec 125 Cr.P.C. Proceedings Cannot Dissolve Marriage under Hindu Marriage Act: Allahabad HC Upholds Family Pension Rights of First Wife

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Allahabad, March 2024: In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has clarified that a compromise reached in proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) does not legally dissolve a marriage governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The decision, delivered by the bench of Justices Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, has significant implications for family pension claims and the sanctity of marriage dissolution.

Legal Point of the Judgement: The court examined the legal framework surrounding the dissolution of a Hindu marriage and the subsequent implications for family pension claims. The key issue was whether a marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act could be dissolved through a compromise in a Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceeding, and what impact this would have on the rights to a family pension of a deceased government employee's spouse.

Facts and Issues: The case involved Rajni Rani, the later wife of a deceased government employee, Bhojraj Singh, who appealed against the dismissal of her writ petition for a family pension claim. The petitioner argued that Bhojraj Singh's first marriage to Usha Devi was dissolved via a compromise in a Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceeding, thus entitling her to the family pension. However, Usha Devi contested this claim, asserting that her marriage with Singh was never legally dissolved.

Court Assessment: The High Court meticulously assessed the legal provisions governing marriage dissolution under the Hindu Marriage Act. It emphasized that "a marriage can only be dissolved through a decree by a competent court." The court found that a compromise in a Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceeding, which primarily deals with maintenance, cannot annul a marriage. The bench remarked, "Even with the consent of the parties, the jurisdiction of the concerned court under Section 125 Cr.P.C. cannot be expanded to pass a decree of divorce."

Decision: The appeal was dismissed, with the court upholding the right of the first wife, Usha Devi, to the family pension. The bench ruled that the marriage between Bhojraj Singh and Usha Devi was not legally dissolved and that Usha Devi's claim to the family pension remains valid.

Decision Date: March 12, 2024.

Rajni Rani Vs. State of UP and 10 Others,

Latest Legal News