125 Cr.P.C.

@ Author

I have noticed Ld. Arvind brings on board some very interesting questions in Law.

For a moment let us not pay attention to the word “widow” for a simple reason in this brief the married man without divorce hi first wife married another women who unfortunately happens to be a widow (status wise) so word widow is just for inference her side will peddle no. of times before concerned Court to get leverage out of the apathy it craves and that is where your skills shall play pivotal role is my belief ld. brother.


Now, allow me to rephrase your que. to different angle and then I try to help you offcourse with your permission ld. brother?

Que.: Who is a legally wedded wife in provided brief as per bare reading down the intent and object of whole Section of the Code which cannot be read in isolation?

Now the reasoning with core reference to your briefs:

If a woman is duped into marriage by a man who is already married, and then deserted, can she claim maintenance for herself and/or her children?

Savitaben was married in 1994 according to the customs and rituals of her religion. Her husband treated her well for a while, and during this time she had a child by him. Thereafter, Savitaben was subjected to mental and physical torture by her husband. She also found out that he was having an illicit relationship with a woman named Veenaben. As she and her child were being neglected, Savitaben filed for maintenance before a magistrate, under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Her husband took the plea that Savitaben was not his legally wedded wife. That he had been married to Veenaben for 22 years and had two children by her. He produced a voters' list, ration card, and provident fund records showing Veenaben as the wife. The magistrate granted maintenance to Savitaben and the child.


In appeal, the Gujarat High Court held that Savitaben was not her husband's legally wedded wife and therefore was not entitled to maintenance. However, the high court increased maintenance for the child from Rs 350 to Rs 500 per month. Savitaben appealed and the matter reached the Supreme Court.

It was argued that Section 125 of the CrPC was intended to protect destitute and harassed women and that the term "wife" should not be given a narrow and rigid interpretation. That fairness and equity demanded an interpretation favouring Savitaben rather than her husband. That the husband had concealed his first marriage and was guilty of fraud and misrepresentation. The submission on behalf of the husband was that the definition of "wife" was well settled and there was no scope for extending its meaning to include a woman not legally married.

The Supreme Court noted that Section 125 of the CrPC provides for maintenance of an illegitimate child but does not include a woman not lawfully married. It observed that this is an inadequacy of the law and operates harshly against a woman who gets into a relationship with a man who suppresses the fact of an earlier marriage. But the court said this lacuna could only be cured by the legislature. The judgment declared that the scope of Section 125 of the CrPC could not be enlarged to include a woman not lawfully married under the expression "wife". Savitaben was thus denied maintenance.


Hence, the issue of maintenance for the second wife, under Section 125 of the CrPC, was settled by the above apex court judgment reported as re.: Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 2005 SC 1809.


However, entitlement to maintenance in similar circumstances under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956 is the subject of a recent Delhi High Court judgment in the case of re.: Narinder Pal Kaur Chawla Vs. M S Chawla, 148 (2008), Delhi Law Times 522 (DB).

In my opinion, if that lady has not divorced with her first husband, the marriage with the widower is null and void.  She is not entitled to maintenance either under Section 125 or DV Act.  But, if the widower has not struck off her name in the pension reacords (he can do it even now) and if her name will be kept there, she will be entitled to pension amount for the reason,  that the pension is self-acquired property and it can be disbursed according to the wishes of the widower.  I cannot give any citation.