New Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that a spouse in a marriage declared void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) is entitled to claim permanent alimony and maintenance under Section 25 of the Act.
A bench, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih, also held that referring to a woman in a void marriage as an “illegitimate wife” or a “faithful mistress” is misogynistic and violates her fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“Under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, every person has a fundamental right to lead a dignified life. Calling a woman an ‘illegitimate wife’ or ‘faithful mistress’ violates her dignity and is against the ethos and ideals of our Constitution,” the Court observed.
The case arose from a dispute where the husband challenged a previous decision granting maintenance in a void marriage, while the wife sought to enforce her right to maintenance despite the nullification of the marriage.
The key legal question before the Court was whether a spouse in a void marriage can claim permanent alimony under Section 25 of the HMA and whether interim maintenance under Section 24 can be granted in proceedings declaring a marriage void.
The apex court criticized the terminology used in a 2004 judgment of the Bombay High Court (Bhausaheb @ Sandhu versus Leelabai), which had coined the term “illegitimate wife” and even referred to such a woman as a “faithful mistress.”
The Court noted: “It is shocking that such adjectives were used in reference to a woman, while no similar terminology was applied to men in void marriages. This language is misogynistic and unacceptable in a society governed by constitutional principles.”
The Supreme Court clarified that even if a marriage is deemed void or voidable, the matrimonial court is not barred from granting maintenance pendente lite under Section 24 of the HMA. Further, under Section 25, a spouse in a void marriage has the right to claim permanent alimony and maintenance from the other spouse, depending on the facts and conduct of the parties.
“The remedy under Section 25 of the HMA is distinct from the provisions under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It grants both husbands and wives in void marriages the right to claim maintenance,” the Court explained.
The Supreme Court set aside the previous ruling and directed that the matter be placed before an appropriate Bench for a decision on merits, allowing the appeal.
