The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that the term “wife” should be interpreted broadly to allow maintenance even when a marriage is considered void or legally invalid.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar stated that the court must recognize the existence of a relationship “in the nature of marriage” for maintenance purposes if the parties were living together as spouses after performing essential marriage rituals.
Justice Brar also emphasized that the existence of a first marriage does not prevent a spouse from claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC if she had been living with a person as his wife. This ruling was made in a case where the marriage between the couple occurred while the first marriage was still subsisting. The family court initially believed the petitioner-wife was not entitled to maintenance as the relationship was considered a live-in arrangement, not a marriage.
Reviewing the case, Justice Brar observed that both the petitioner and the respondent-husband had participated in a second marriage ceremony. It was reasonable to infer that they cohabitated as husband and wife until September 2015, when the respondent-husband discovered that the petitioner had been previously married.
Before concluding the order, Justice Brar remanded the case back to the District Judge, Family Court, Barnala, to determine the amount of maintenance to be awarded.
