http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: K.VIMAL

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: K.VEERASWAMY

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/03/1991

BENCH: FATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J) BENCH: FATHIMA BEEVI, M. (J) AHMADI, A.M. (J) RAMASWAMI, V. (J) II

CITATION:  1991 SCR  (1) 904        1991 SCC  (2) 375  JT 1991 (2)   182        1991 SCALE  (1)495

ACT:     Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: section 125-scope and object of- Wife’s application for maintenance-Husband’s plea of  marriage  being void on account of  subsistence  of  his earliar marriage-HeldCourt should insist on strick proof  of earliar marriage- Insurance nomination and entry in  Indenty Card are not conclusive of substance of earliar marriage.

HEADNOTE:      The appellant-wife filed an application for maintenance against respondent-husband under section 125 of the Code  of Criminal  procedure,  1973.  The  respondent  contested  the application on the ground that appellant was not his legally wedded  wife  since their marriage was void  on  account  of subsistence of respondent’s earlier marriage. The Magistrate awarded  a  monthly maintenance of Rs. 400 to  the  wife  by holding  that  the  respondent  has  not  proved  his  first marrige.  The order of the magistrate  was set aside by  the High  Court in revision accepting the respodent’s plea  that his first marriage was subsisting when the respodent married the appellant.      In  appeal to this court it was contented on behalf  of the respodent that the High Court had no material before  it for arriving at the finding that there was an earlier  valid marriage on the date respondent married the appellant.      Allowing the appeal, this Court.      HELD:1 Section 125 of the code of Criminal Procedure is meant  to achieve a social purpose.The object is to  prevent vagrancy  and destitution. it provides a speedy  remedy  for the  supply  of food,clothing and shelter  to  the  deserted wife. The term "wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by a husband or who has obtained a divorce from her  husband and has not remarried.The woman not having the legal  status of a wife is thus brought within the inclusive definition of the term "Wife" consistent with the objective. However,under the  law a second wife whose marriage is void on account  of the survival of the first marriage is                                                        905 not  a legally wedded wife and is,therefore,not entitled  to maintenance  under this provision. Therefore, the law  which disentitles the second wife from receiving maintenance  from

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

her  husband for the sole reason that the marriage  ceremony though performed in the customary from lacks legal  sanctity can  be applied only when the husband satisfactorily  proves the  subsistence of a legal and valid marriage  particularly when the provision in the Code is ameasure of social justice intended to protect women and children. Accordingly, when an attempt is made by the husband to negative the claim of  the neglected  wife  depicting  her as a  kept-mistress  on  the specious plea that he was already married, the court  should insist on strict proof of the earlier marriage. [907D-H]       2. The respondent has not discharged the heavy  burden by  tendering strict proof of the fact in issue. He  clearly admitted  his marriage with the appellant acording to  Hindu rites.  But  there  is no clear  admission  of  his  earlier marriage  to  dispense with the proof  of  subsisting  valid first  marriage when the second marriage was solemnised.  In the  absence  of such an admission, the statement  that  the respondent was living with another woman as husband and wife cannot  persuade  was court to hold that the  marriage  duly solemnised between the appellant and the respondent  suffers from any legal infirmity. [906C-H]      3. The nomination in the Insurance Policy and Entry  in the  Identity  Card, referred to by the High Court  are  not conclusive  of the subsistence of a valid  marriage  between the  respondent  and his earlier wife. The  High  Court  has failed  to consider the standard of proof required  and  has proceeded  on  no  evidence whatsoever  in  determining  the question  against the appeallant. Accordingly the  order  of the High Court is set aside and the order of  the Magistrate is restored. [907B-C]

JUDGMENT:      CRIMINAL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal  Appeal  No. 664 of 1990.      From the  Judgement and Order dated  13.3.1990  of  the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Revision Case No.  532 of 1989.      K. Ramkumar for the Appellant.      B. Kanta Rao for the Respondent.      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      FATIMA BEEVI, J. The appellant and the respondent got                                                        906 married according to Hindu rites and customs  on  June   30, 1983.   They  lived  together until  the  appellant  started complaining of desertion  and ill-treatment.  She moved  the court  for  maintenance  by  an  application  under  Section 125   of  the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure.   Though   the claim  was resisted on the ground that the appellant is  not the   legally wedded  wife  of  the  respondent   who    had earlier    married   one Veeramma, the  learned   magistrate awarded  a  monthly  maintenance  of Rs.400 holding that the first  marriage  has  not been   proved.   The   order  was, however,   set-aside  by  the  High   Court   in    revision accepting   the plea that the first marriage was  subsisting when  the  respondent  married the appellant.      We  have  granted special leave to appeal  against  the order   of   the High Court.  We have been   taken   through the   pleadings  and  the  evidence by the  learned  counsel for   the  appellant  for  the  purpose  of satisfying  that the High Court had no material before it for arriving at the finding  that there was a valid marriage  between   Veeramma and   the  respondent on the day  the   respondent   married the  appellant.  It  is pointed out that the appellant   had

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

nowhere   admitted   the  subsistence of  a  valid  marriage which  would  render  her  marriage  illegal.  The appellant stated  in  her petition that one year after  her  marriage, she came  to  know  that  respondent  married  Veeramma  and lived    with    her in  Hyderabad   and   soon   thereafter Veeramma   started  living  along  with the  appellant   and the  respondent  and,  thus  extra-marital  relationship  of the  respondent  with  Veeramma  has  disrupted  her  family life.    In fact, the respondent had in his counter   flatly denied   all  the  averments made by the appellant  in   the petition  and  maintained  that  a  marriage ceremony    was performed   between    Veeramma    and    the     respondent when both were  children  and  the  appellant  is  only  his kept-mistress.  The  respondent   has,   however,    clearly admitted   that   he  married  the  appellant  according  to Hindu  rites.  When  that  marriage  is  repudiated as  void on    account   of   the   subsistence   of    an    earlier marriage,   the respondent  was  bound  to  prove  that   he married    Veeramma    in    the  customary  form  and   the marriage   was   subsisting  in  the  year  1983   when  the appellant  was  married  to  him.  As  rightly  pointed  out by    the learned counsel for the appellant, there   is   no clear   admission   of  an earlier  marriage   between   the respondent   and  Veeramma  to   dispense with the proof  of subsisting   valid   first   marriage   when   the    second marriage  was  solemnised.   In  the  absence  of  such   an admission,   the   statement that the respondent  is  living with  another woman as husband  and   wife  cannot  persuade the  court to  hold  that  the  marriage   duly   solemnised between  the appellant and the respondent suffers from   any legal  infirmity.  The High Court has referred to Ex.   R-12 and  R-  13  relied  on                                                        907 by  the respondent to prove that he  was  already   married. Ex.  R-  12  is  the insurance  policy  issued  On  5.   12. 1975   where   the   name   of   the  nominee  is  shown  as Veeramma   indicating   that  she  is  the   wife   of   the respondent.   Ex.   R-  13 is  the  family   identity   card issued   by   the  Road Transport  Corporation   where   the respondent   was   working   in   1977. These documents  are issued on the  basis  of  what  the  respondent  himself had stated.    The   entries  are  not   conclusive    of    the subsistence   a  valid  marriage  between   the   respondent and   Veeramma.  If  they   had been  living   together   as husband  and  wife  even  without  performing  a  ceremonial marriage,  and  the  respondent  represented  that  Veeramma was  his wife, it is possible that such entries would   come into    existence.   Therefore,    these    documents     by themselves  cannot  prove  any   marriage or the subsistence of a valid marriage when the  admitted  marriage  with   the appellant was solemnised.      Section   125  of  the  Code  of   Criminal   Procedure is    meant    to  achieve a  social  purpose.   The  object is  to  prevent   vagrancy   and destitution.  It   provides a  speedy  remedy  for  the  supply  of   food, clothing and shelter  to the deserted wife.  When an  attempt   is   made by  the  husband to negative the claim  of   the   neglected wife   depicting   her as a kept-mistress on  the   specious plea   that   he   was  already  married,  the  court  would insist on strict proof of the  earlier  marriage.  The  term wife’   in   Section   15   of   the   Code   of    Criminal Procedure   includes  a woman  who  has  been  divorced   by a   husband  or  who  has   obtained   a divorce  from   her husband   and   has   not   remarried.   The    woman    not having  the  legal  status of a   wife   is   thus   brought

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

within   the   inclusive  definition of  the   term   ’wife’ consistent  with  the  objective.  However, under the law  a second  wife whose marriage  is  void  an  account  of   the survival of the first marriage is not a legally wedded  wife and is,  therefore, not entitled to maintenance  under  this provision.  Therefore,  the law which disentitles the second wife   from  receiving  maintenance  from her husband  under Section  125, Cr.  P.C.,  for  the  sole  reason  that   the marriage   ceremony  though  performed  in   the   customary form    lacks legal  sanctity  can  be  applied  only   when the   husband   satisfactorily proves the subsistence  of  a legal    and   valid   marriage   particularly    when   the provision  in the Code  is  a  measure  of  social   justice intended  to protect women and children.  We are  unable  to find   that   the   respondent herein  has  discharged   the heavy   burden  by  tendering  strict  proof of the fact  in issue.   The High Court failed  to  consider  the   standard of proof  required  and  has  proceeded   on   no   evidence whatsoever    in  determining  the  question   against   the appellant.  We   are,   therefore, unable to agree that  the appellant is not entitled to maintenance.                                                        908      We  find  that there is no dispute that  the  appellant was   married   to the respondent in the   customary   form. They  lived  together  as  husband and wife and of late  the respondent   had    neglected   to   maintain    her.    The respondent  has  no  case  that  the  appellant  has   means to   maintain herself or that the  amount  she  has  claimed is  not  commensurate  with the means  of  the   respondent. The   learned   magistrate  was,  therefore,  justified   in awarding  an  amount  of  Rs.400  per  mensem  towards   the maintenance   of  the  appellant.   That   order   of    the magistrate  has  to  be restored.      In the result, we allow the appeal, set-aside the order of  the  High Court and restore that of the trial court. T. N. A.                                      Appeal allowed.                                                        909