Couple Residing As Husband & Wife For A Considerable Long Time: Madhya Pradesh HC Upholds Maintenance Order
|The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld an order granting maintenance noticing that the couple had been residing as husband and wife for a considerably long time.
A Single Bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia observed, “Since the applicant and respondent were residing as husband and wife for a considerable long time and in absence of any specific finding by the Trial Court that respondent is not a legally wedded wife of the applicant, this Court is of considered opinion that the Trial Court did not commit any mistake by awarding maintenance to the respondent under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.”
Advocate Priyal Rahangdale represented the applicant.
The application, filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., challenged the orders of the trial court directing the applicant to pay monthly maintenance to his long-term live-in partner.
The applicant challenged the said order arguing that the respondent, his partner, had failed to prove that their marriage took place in a temple with Hindu rituals. The applicant had argued that since the respondent was not his legally wedded wife, an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was not maintainable.
On the contrary, the trial court had observed that since the respondent had given birth to a child and since the applicant and respondent were residing as husband and wife for a considerably long time, the respondent was entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Kamala v. M.R. Mohan Kumar (2019) 11 SCC 491 where it was held that when parties live together as husband and wife, there is a presumption that they are a legally married couple for claim of maintenance of wife under Section 125 CrPC.
In light of the same, the Court stated that the trial court did not commit any mistake by awarding maintenance to the respondent under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. even though she was not legally wedded to the applicant.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the application.
Cause Title: XYZ v. ABC
Appearance:
Applicant: Advocate Priyal Rahangdale