May 30, 2023: A woman’s second marriage is not valid if her divorce from her first husband is not decreed by a court, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled. The second wife would thus not quality as the legally wedded wife of the new husband, and would not be entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, the court added.
Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, talks about maintenance of wives, children and parents.
While doing so, the HC set aside an order by the Siliguri family court, asking a woman’s second husband to pay her a monthly maintenance allowance. The court was hearing a case where the wife had married her second husband on March 29, 2017. On August 11 that year, he threw the women out of the house because of her failure to arrange dowry. The wife file an application under Section 125 under the CrPC before the principal judge family court Singrauli in 2018 which was partly allowed via order dated March 25, 2022. The family court had directed the husband to pay Rs 10,000 monthly maintenance to the wife even though it was revealed that she had not divorced her first husband.
In his petition the husband argued that the woman was previously married in 2006-07, and had separated from her first husband because of a family dispute. “Without taking divorce from the first husband, she cannot be said to be the legally wedded wife of the petitioner. On that basis alone, the application for maintenance is not maintainable,” the petition said.
“The term wife under Section 125 of the CrPC does not envisage a situation where both the parties in the alleged marriage have living spouses. This court is of the opinion that the respondent cannot seek maintenance from the petitioner under this provision,” Judge Rajendra Kumar Verma said in his order.
“While the court sympathises with the position of the respondent, it is constrained to deny her maintenance as per the law of the land which stands as of today. However, the respondent has the liberty to avail other remedies that may be better suited to the facts and circumstances of this case, such as seeking of compensation under Section 22 of the DV Act,” the 30-page court order added.
See also: Widow not liable to maintain in-laws under Section 125 of CrPC: HC
An alumna of the Indian Institute of Mass Communication, Dhenkanal, Sunita Mishra brings over 16 years of expertise to the fields of legal matters, financial insights, and property market trends. Recognised for her ability to elucidate complex topics, her articles serve as a go-to resource for home buyers navigating intricate subjects. Through her extensive career, she has been associated with esteemed organisations like the Financial Express, Hindustan Times, Network18, All India Radio, and Business Standard.
In addition to her professional accomplishments, Sunita holds an MA degree in Sanskrit, with a specialisation in Indian Philosophy, from Delhi University. Outside of her work schedule, she likes to unwind by practising Yoga, and pursues her passion for travel.
[email protected]
Related Posts
What is a Muslim woman’s right to property?.
Property rights of second wife and her children.
Divorced Muslim woman entitled to maintenance even after Iddat: Allahabad HC.
Andhra Pradesh RERA: About AP RERA website, complaints and news.
Who is a coparcener in an HUF?.
E-challan status: Everything you need to know.
