Jammu and Kashmir High Court Denies Maintenance Claim in Live-In Relationship Case
Court rules that a woman in a live-in relationship with a man convicted of rape cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
In a significant judgment delivered by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul dismissed a petition by Murti Devi seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, from Balkar Singh, with whom she was in a live-in relationship. The court upheld the decision of the Principal Sessions Judge, Kathua, which set aside an earlier order granting interim maintenance to Murti Devi, citing the lack of a legal marriage and the conviction of Balkar Singh for rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Murti Devi had approached the court after feeling aggrieved by the Principal Sessions Judge's order dated 07/12/2021, which reversed the interim maintenance granted by the trial Magistrate in favor of Murti Devi and her child. The interim maintenance was initially set at Rs. 2,000 for Murti Devi and Rs. 1,000 for her child.
The court, however, found that Murti Devi could not be entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., as the relationship did not meet the legal criteria for marriage. Justice Koul emphasized that the conviction of Balkar Singh for rape, based on Murti Devi's complaint, negated the possibility of treating the relationship as a marriage for maintenance purposes.
The judgment highlighted that Section 125 Cr.P.C. is designed to prevent vagrancy and destitution by providing support to women, children, and other dependents. However, it clarified that this provision applies only within the context of a legal marriage. The court further noted that when a man is convicted of rape, the relationship between him and the complainant cannot be classified as a valid marriage under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Murti Devi argued that she had lived with Balkar Singh for ten years and gave birth to a child during their time together, thus forming a relationship akin to marriage. However, the court found that no formal marriage was ever solemnized between the parties, and Balkar Singh's conviction for rape undermined any claim to a marital relationship.
The judgment also referenced previous Supreme Court rulings, including Chanmuniya v. Virendera Kumar Singh Kushwaha, which asserted that provisions under Section 125 Cr.P.C. should serve as a measure of social justice. Nonetheless, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court maintained that legal loopholes cannot be exploited to claim maintenance where a legal marriage does not exist, particularly when a serious criminal conviction is involved.
The court concluded by affirming the Principal Sessions Judge's decision, stating that the order was well-reasoned and did not constitute a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, Murti Devi's petition was dismissed, reinforcing the stance that maintenance claims under Section 125 Cr.P.C. require a legally recognized marriage.
Bottom Line:
Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. - A woman in a live-in relationship with a man cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. if the relationship is deemed to lack the legal status of a marriage, especially when the man is convicted of rape under Section 376 IPC based on her complaint.
Statutory provision(s): Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376
Murti Devi v. Balkar Singh, (Jammu And Kashmir) : Law Finder Doc id # 2787263
