Madras High Court: Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Despite Invalid Marriage
The Madras High Court recently ruled that a wife and her child are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, even if the marriage is deemed invalid. This landmark decision underscores the importance of providing support regardless of the marriage’s legal status.
Justice K Murali Shankar of the Madurai bench reviewed a revision petition concerning a Family Court order in Tirunelveli. The court had directed a man to pay a monthly maintenance of ₹10,000 to his “wife” and their son, along with clearing all arrears within a month.
The woman had filed for maintenance, claiming that her husband neglected to support her and their son despite being legally obligated. She also alleged that he demanded a dowry of ₹25 lakh and, when she couldn’t meet the demand, he began avoiding her. She revealed that he earned a monthly salary of ₹50,000 and received over ₹90,000 in rent from his 11 properties.
The man contested the marriage and the child’s paternity. He stated that he was married to another woman since 2011 and had a child with her. Despite filing for divorce, the petition was dismissed, and an appeal is pending. He claimed his actual salary was only ₹11,500, and he was already paying ₹7,000 in maintenance to his first wife and child. He argued that since there was no valid marriage between him and the woman, he was not liable for maintenance.
The court examined the documents and noted that the man’s first marriage was still valid. Although the second “wife” presented a marriage invitation, photos, and the child’s birth certificate, the court found that the second marriage couldn’t be valid since the first marriage was still in effect.
The woman also provided cell phone records and WhatsApp messages as evidence. Initially, the man admitted to sending the messages but later claimed he lost his phone. The court dismissed his claim as the messages were sent in 2019, making his argument irrelevant.
When asked if he would take a DNA test to confirm paternity, the man refused. The court concluded that the couple lived together as husband and wife, and their child was born from this relationship.
The man argued his salary was only ₹11,500 but failed to provide any supporting documents. Given this, the court upheld the trial court’s order for a monthly maintenance of ₹10,000 each for the woman and her child as reasonable.
In conclusion, the Madras High Court dismissed the man’s petition, reaffirming the maintenance order.
Case Title: Loyola Selva Kumar v Sharon Nisha
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
