The Allahabad High Court, in a significant ruling, held that the subsistence of a first marriage is irrelevant while deciding an application for maintenance pendente lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The Division Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Avnish Saxena passed this judgment while hearing the appeal filed by a woman whose application for interim maintenance had been rejected by the Family Court.
The case revolved around a dispute where the husband had filed a petition declaring the marriage void under Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, citing that the appellant-wife had a living spouse at the time of their marriage. During the pendency of this case, the wife filed an application under Section 24 of the Act, seeking interim maintenance and litigation expenses.
Read Also:- Punjab & Haryana High Court: State Cannot Withhold Retiral Benefits Over FIR If Challan Was Filed Long Ago
The Family Court rejected her application on the ground that the wife had concealed her prior marriage, which had ended only on 15th April 2024, and therefore, she was not entitled to maintenance.
However, the High Court reversed this finding.
“What is important is for the Court to ascertain whether the party seeking maintenance pendente lite and expenses requires it, as to be paid by the other party in a matrimonial dispute pending adjudication,”
— observed the Bench.
Read Also:- Mumbai Court hikes domestic violence compensation from 5 lakh to 1 crore citing husband’s assets
The appellant argued that she had a long-standing relationship with the respondent, who worked in the Police Department and earned ₹65,000 per month apart from running a construction material business. She claimed ₹20,000 per month for her sustenance.
The respondent, on the other hand, referred to a recent Supreme Court decision stating that the grant of maintenance is discretionary and must take into account the conduct of the parties. He alleged that the wife had misled him by hiding her earlier marriage and claimed she was employed in the Income Tax Department.
Read Also:- Rajasthan High Court Sets Aside Closure of Party's Evidence; Stresses “Justice Hurried Is Justice Buried”
However, the High Court emphasized that under Section 24, the deciding factor is not the validity of the marriage but whether the applicant is financially dependent.
“It may well be that appellant had concealed and misled respondent about herself... However, there was no material on record before the Family Court to show that appellant had any means to support herself,”
— stated the Court.
The Court noted that no documentary evidence was produced by the husband to prove the wife’s alleged employment. It also acknowledged that the couple had lived together after their marriage and the wife was now residing in Jhansi.
Setting aside the Family Court’s order, the High Court directed the husband to pay a consolidated sum of ₹15,000 per month to the wife as maintenance pendente lite, starting from 15th April 2025, the date of her original application.
Read Also:- SC's landmark judgement: Victims have independent right to appeal under CrPC
“Respondent will pay from date of the application... The arrears including current are to be paid by 14th June 2025 and subsequent monthly maintenance within 7th of the succeeding month,”
— ordered the Bench.
The Court also urged the Family Court to expedite the pending matrimonial proceedings and instructed that the appellant should not seek adjournments.
Case Title: Savita Devi @ Pinki Gautam @ Shivangi Shishodiya v. Jitendra Gautam
