Court holds divorced woman can seek maintenance from date of divorce till remarriage; directs fresh adjudication on wife and son’s claims, with interim monthly support of Rs. 4,000.
The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has set aside a Family Court order that had rejected a wife’s maintenance plea in full, holding that such a blanket dismissal was legally unsustainable. The Court ruled that even after a divorce on the ground of desertion, a woman continues to be entitled to claim maintenance as a divorced wife under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, provided she has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra was hearing a criminal revision filed by Smt. Suneeta against the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sultanpur, which had dismissed her maintenance petition along with that of her son. The High Court found that the Family Court had erred in treating the wife’s alleged refusal to live with her husband and the fact of some maintenance being paid through Army authorities as grounds to reject her claim entirely.
According to the case record, Suneeta married Rajesh Kumar Yadav in childhood and was sent to her matrimonial home after the gauna ceremony. She alleged cruelty, dowry demands, and abandonment, claiming that her husband, an Army personnel, later remarried and refused to maintain her and their child. The husband, however, denied the allegations and contended that she had deserted him without sufficient cause.
The Family Court had dismissed the maintenance petition mainly on the reasoning that the wife had failed to prove sufficient cause for living separately and that 15% of the husband’s salary was already being deducted and paid towards maintenance. The High Court, however, noted that the evidence showed conflicting versions about whether the deductions were meant for the wife alone, the child alone, or both. It also recorded that the husband’s service records and other documents suggested the possibility of a second marriage.
Relying on Supreme Court precedents including Rohtash Singh v. Smt. Ramendri and Rajnesh v. Neha, the High Court held that a divorced wife remains a “wife” for the limited purpose of claiming maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The Court clarified that the disqualification under Section 125(4), which applies when a ????? refuses to live with her husband without sufficient reason, presupposes an existing marriage and cannot be used to deny maintenance after divorce.
The Court further held that the minor son is entitled to maintenance till he attains majority, but any period during which maintenance was already received through Army authorities must be excluded to avoid double benefit. Since the husband had been discharged from service, the Army stopped the maintenance allowance, and the Court directed that the matter be re-examined by the Family Court.
Setting aside the impugned order, the High Court remitted the case for fresh decision and directed both parties to file affidavits of assets, income, and liabilities in line with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rajnesh v. Neha. It also ordered the husband to pay Rs. 4,000 per month as interim maintenance to the wife during the pendency of the rehearing. Any amount already paid under earlier interim orders will be adjusted against arrears, if maintenance is ultimately awarded.
The revision petition was accordingly allowed.
Bottom Line:
Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC - Rejection of wife's maintenance claim in toto held unsustainable - Divorced wife remains entitled to claim maintenance from date of divorce till remarriage if unable to maintain herself - Child entitled to maintenance till majority, excluding period for which maintenance was already received through Army authorities - Matter remanded for fresh decision with direction to file affidavits of assets, income and liabilities as per Rajnesh v. Neha.
Statutory provision(s): Section 125 CrPC, Section 19(4) Family Courts Act, 1984, Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 91(1) Army Act/Army Rules reference in service record context
Smt. Suneeta v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2983403
