PUSHP LATA Vs. PANKAJ GOYAL
LAWS(P&H)-2014-12-421
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 12,2014

PUSHP LATA Appellant
VERSUS
Pankaj Goyal Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The petitioner-wife has been denied maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., on the ground that as her marriage with respondent has been annulled under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, she would not be entitled to any relief under the said proceedings.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Division Bench judgment of Kerala High Court in Surendran Vs. Najima Bindu, 2012 3 RCR(Civ) 436 wherein it has been held that a wife whose marriage has been annulled under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, is entitled to maintenance from her husband under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
(3.) The operative part of the judgment reads as follows: "69. To conclude, we hold that Explanation (b) to S.125 (1) Cr.P.C., must receive an interpretation consistent with the laudable legislative purpose, object and rationale to prevent vagrancy and avoid destitution. We take the view that "the wife" under Explanation (b) must include any woman whose marriage has been brought to severance by acts of spouses including a decree passed by court at their instance under S.12 or S.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The accent is that such wife in a terminated marriage - unilaterally or by intervention of court, must remain unmarried to claim inclusion within the ambit of deemed wife under Explanation (b). The realistic acceptance of the fact that the wife in an annulled marriage cannot, in fact, be placed by law to her position of maidenhood/spinstership prior to marriage demands and warrants such an expansive interpretation of the expression "wife" in Explanation (b). The fact that consequences of an annulment are not declared in Hindu Marriage Act, specifically and the fact that for the purpose of Ss.16, 25 and 15 the law realistically accepts that such marriage cannot be ignored, overlooked or forgotten and has to be equated to a marriage dissolved under Section 13 does also help us to accept the wider meaning for the expression "wife" in Explanation (b). The fact that under the personal law applicable to the parties, there is a liability for the husband in an annulled marriage to pay permanent alimony and maintenance to the wife under certain circumstances does also embolden us to include the wife in an annulled marriage also within the ambit of a deemed wife under Explanation (b). We take the view that such a woman falls within the sweep of the definition of "wife" under Explanation (b).";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.