Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

High Court Affirms Denial of Maintenance to Woman in Deceptive Marriage

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court has affirmed the denial of maintenance to a woman who entered into a deceptive marriage with a married man. The case, [Case Name and Citation], highlights the complexities surrounding the interpretation of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and the eligibility for maintenance under such circumstances.

The Court emphasized that the woman, who was already married to another man, failed to provide sufficient evidence of divorce or legal dissolution of her previous marriage. As per Sections 5 and 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a marriage may be solemnized between two Hindus only if neither party has a living spouse at the time of the marriage. In this case, the woman's existing marriage was still subsisting, rendering her subsequent marriage void.

The Court acknowledged the social justice objectives of Section 125 Cr.P.C. but concluded that the statutory provision does not encompass situations where both parties in an alleged marriage have living spouses. While sympathizing with the woman's position, the Court emphasized that its decision was based on the prevailing law and encouraged the woman to explore alternative remedies, such as seeking compensation under Section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of establishing legal validity in marital relationships and the limitations on eligibility for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Court's decision highlights the need for legislative reforms to address the exploitation faced by women in such circumstances, especially those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

D.D-12th OF MAY, 2023

BHAGWANDAS  vs PANPATI SHAH

Latest Legal News