Last Updated:
The Allahabad High Court directed the family court to reconsider the woman’s claim for maintenance afresh, without disturbing the maintenance already awarded to her daughter.
Finding the family court’s order “patently illegal and perverse”, the High Court set it aside and remanded the matter back to the Family Court, Chandauli.
The Allahabad High Court has held that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely because her marriage is voidable unless a court has passed a decree declaring it a nullity. The judgment came in a criminal revision filed by a woman, whose plea for maintenance had earlier been rejected by a family court in Chandauli.
On November 2, 2017, the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chandauli, dismissed the woman’s claim for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). While the court granted Rs 2,000 per month for her minor daughter, it refused any relief to the woman herself. The trial court relied on Section 125(4) CrPC, reasoning that she had chosen to live separately from her husband without reasonable cause. The finding was based on her statement that her husband had concealed his previous marriage and divorce.
Recommended Stories
In its decision, the family court went a step further by invoking Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It concluded that since concealment of material facts could render a marriage voidable, the woman was not entitled to maintenance. This interpretation was strongly criticised by the High Court.
Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla, on September 24, 2025, noted that the family court’s reasoning was not only unfounded but also contrary to law.
A mere passing reference to the concealment of previous marriage and divorce cannot justify the inference that the wife was living separately without reasonable cause, the court observed.
The judge added that until a decree of nullity is granted, a voidable marriage continues to be legally valid and all rights flowing from it, including the right to maintenance, remain intact.
Court referred to the Supreme Court’s recent pronouncement in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025), which held that even if a marriage is void or voidable, a spouse may still claim maintenance or alimony, depending on the facts and conduct of the parties. This, the High Court pointed out, reinforced the principle that maintenance cannot be denied solely on hypothetical grounds.
Finding the family court’s order “patently illegal and perverse”, the High Court set it aside and remanded the matter back to the Family Court, Chandauli. It directed the family court to reconsider the woman’s claim for maintenance afresh, without disturbing the maintenance already awarded to her daughter, and to conclude proceedings within three months.
About the Author
Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr…Read More
Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr… Read More
September 29, 2025, 17:18 IST
Loading comments…
Read More
