Second Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC If De Facto Separation from First Marriage Proven: Supreme Court

Supreme Court has ruled that a woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC from her second husband, even if her first marriage is not legally dissolved, provided that she is de facto separated and not deriving benefits from her first husband.

In Smt. N. Usha Rani & Anr. vs. Moodududla Srinivas, the Court overturned a High Court ruling that denied maintenance to the appellant, citing her subsisting first marriage. The Court reasoned that the respondent-husband was fully aware of the appellant’s previous marital status when he married her not once, but twice. Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, delivering the judgment, emphasized that “maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is not a benefit received by a wife but rather a legal and moral duty owed by the husband.”

The case revolved around a woman whose first marriage was dissolved through a Memorandum of Understanding rather than a formal legal decree. She subsequently married the respondent and had a child with him, only for their relationship to deteriorate. When she sought maintenance, the High Court ruled against her, stating that she was not legally a “wife” under Section 125 CrPC.

However, the Supreme Court took a purposive approach, referencing Rameshchandra Rampratapji Daga vs. Rameshwari Rameshchandra Daga (2005) 2 SCC 33 and Chanmuniya vs. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011) 1 SCC 141, which advocated an expansive interpretation of “wife” in cases of maintenance. “Men should not be allowed to benefit from legal loopholes by enjoying the advantages of a de facto marriage without undertaking its duties and obligations,” the Court observed.

The judgment also referenced Mohd. Abdul Samad vs. State of Telangana (2024 SCC OnLine SC 1686), stressing the importance of financial security for homemakers. The Court noted that in Indian society, “a wife who does not have an independent source of finance is dependent on her husband not only emotionally but also financially.”

By restoring the Family Court’s decision to grant maintenance, the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the intent of Section 125 CrPC is to prevent vagrancy and destitution, rather than rigidly adhere to legal technicalities.

Date of Decision: January 30, 2025