Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

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

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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

 

Latest Legal News