Background
The Allahabad High Court has held that a divorced woman can claim maintenance from her former husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) even where the divorce was granted on the ground of her alleged desertion.
Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra made the observation while allowing a criminal revision filed by a woman challenging the Family Court, Sultanpur’s rejection of her maintenance claim.
The woman had originally filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 CrPC in 2009. She alleged that after her marriage, she was subjected to harassment and dowry demands by her husband and his family. She further alleged that her husband subsequently claimed to have entered into another marriage and refused to maintain her and their child.
The husband disputed these allegations and claimed that the woman had deserted him and was unwilling to live with him. During the proceedings, it emerged that he had obtained an ex parte divorce decree on September 25, 2014, on the ground of desertion. The High Court also noted material indicating that he had subsequently remarried.
Legal Issue
The principal question before the High Court was whether a woman loses her right to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC merely because she has been divorced on the ground of desertion.
Section 125 CrPC provides a remedy for maintenance to a wife who is unable to maintain herself, subject to the statutory conditions. Explanation (b) to Section 125(1) includes a divorced woman who has not remarried within the expression “wife” for the purpose of the provision.
The husband had obtained the divorce on the ground that the woman had deserted him. The issue was therefore whether the finding of desertion in the divorce proceedings prevented her from subsequently claiming maintenance as a divorced wife.
Court Ruling
The High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s judgment in Rohtash Singh v. Smt. Ramendri (2000), which dealt with a similar question.
In that case, the Supreme Court held that although divorce brings the marital relationship to an end, a divorced woman continues to fall within the meaning of “wife” under Section 125 CrPC for the limited purpose of claiming maintenance, provided she has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself.
The Supreme Court had also clarified that where a divorce was granted on the ground of desertion, that fact by itself does not prevent the divorced woman from claiming maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
Following this principle, the Allahabad High Court held that the Family Court had erred in rejecting the woman’s maintenance claim in its entirety.
The Court clarified that even if she was not entitled to maintenance for the period before the divorce, she could claim maintenance from the date of the divorce, September 25, 2014, onwards, provided she had not remarried and satisfied the requirements of Section 125 CrPC.
The Court also held that the woman’s minor son was entitled to maintenance until attaining majority, after taking into account the maintenance already received through the husband’s Army authorities.
The matter was remitted to the Family Court for fresh determination. The parties were directed to file affidavits disclosing their assets, income and liabilities in accordance with the Supreme Court’s directions in Rajnesh v. Neha.
Pending the fresh determination of the maintenance amount, the High Court directed the husband to pay ₹4,000 per month as interim maintenance to the woman.
Implications
The judgment clarifies that a divorce decree does not automatically extinguish a divorced woman’s right to seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
A divorced woman can continue to fall within the statutory meaning of “wife” for the limited purpose of Section 125 where she has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself. The fact that the divorce was granted on the ground of desertion does not, by itself, create a bar to such a claim.
The ruling also distinguishes between the right to claim maintenance and the determination of the amount payable. The Court did not finally determine the woman’s entitlement to a particular amount for the entire period. Instead, it remitted the matter to the Family Court to assess the parties’ financial circumstances and determine the appropriate maintenance.
The judgment further recognises the independent maintenance claim of the minor child, subject to accounting for amounts already received through other sources.
The decision adds clarity on the maintenance rights of divorced women under Section 125 CrPC and reiterates that the ground on which a divorce was granted does not, by itself, prevent a divorced woman from seeking statutory maintenance.
Case Title: Suneeta v. State of U.P. & Anr.
