Wife Entitled to Maintenance Unless Voidable Marriage Annulled by Decree: Allahabad High Court

The woman filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before the Family Court, where she had sought financial support from her husband. The Family Court in 2017 dismissed her claim, citing Section 125(4) CrPC, which bars maintenance to a wife living separately without sufficient cause. However, the court allowed maintenance of Rs. 2,000 per month for their minor daughter.

The Family Court relied on the fact that the woman had alleged her husband had concealed his earlier marriage and divorce. Referring to Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deals with voidable marriages based on fraud or concealment, the court held that she was disentitled to maintenance. The judge observed that if a marriage could be annulled, the wife could not claim support.

This reasoning was strongly disapproved by the High Court. Justice Shukla noted that notices had been served on the husband as far back as 2018, but he never appeared before the court nor contested the claims. Despite repeated opportunities, including peremptory listings, he chose to remain absent.

The High Court found that the Family Court’s order was “patently illegal and perverse". A mere passing reference to concealment of a previous marriage could not justify the conclusion that the woman had abandoned her matrimonial obligations without reasonable cause, the court said.

“Unless and until a marriage, which is voidable, has been declared a nullity by a decree, the status of the revisionist as the legally wedded wife persists and all the rights that flow from the same continue,” the order stated.

Court further observed that invoking Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act without any annulment proceedings was wholly misplaced. Merely on a hypothetical consideration that the marriage could be annulled, the wife loses her right to claim maintenance is perverse and uncalled for, court noted.

Court referred to the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025 SCC OnLine SC 299). The apex court had clarified that even if a marriage is prima facie void or voidable, maintenance can still be granted under Section 24 or Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, depending on the facts and conduct of the parties.

Following these observations, the High Court set aside the Family Court’s decision insofar as it denied maintenance to the wife. Court remanded the to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chandauli, with directions to reconsider the woman's claim in light of the court's observation. Court directed that a fresh order be passed within three months, without disturbing the maintenance already awarded to the minor daughter.