In an important judgment offering a broad social and legal perspective on marriage, maintenance and social welfare, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the word “wife” has to be interpreted to include providing maintenance even in cases where This should be done widely where marriage can take place. Will be considered void or legally invalid.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar of the High Court also clarified that the court is bound to infer the existence of a relationship “in the nature of marriage” for the purpose of maintenance, when both the parties are spouses after the completion of the required marriage. Were having sex as. Custom.
Justice Brar further said that subsistence of the first marriage will not prevent a spouse from claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC if she is living with the person as his wife. The decision came in a case where the marriage was solemnized during the existence of a first marriage between the couple. During the arguments, the Bench was told that the Family Court was of the opinion that the petitioner-wife was not entitled to maintenance as both the parties were only in a live-in relationship and were not married.
Taking up the matter, Justice Brar said that a perusal of the records indicated that both the petitioner and the respondent-husband had entered into a second marriage. A reasonable conclusion that can be drawn in this case is that both the parties were living as husband and wife after performing the “required marriage ceremony” till September 2015, when the respondent-husband allegedly came to know that the petitioner had married for the second time. Is of. ,
Before parting with the order, Justice Brar sent the case back to the District Judge, Family Court, Barnala to decide on the quantum of maintenance.
