Holding

A marriage solemnised in contravention of Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act is void ab initio and the woman is not a "wife" within the meaning of Section 125 CrPC, thus she is not entitled to maintenance.

Summary

Smt. Yamunabai married Anantrao Shivram Adhav in June 1974 while he already had a living wife. The marriage, performed under Hindu rites, was challenged for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The trial court and the Bombay High Court dismissed her claim. The Supreme Court examined whether a woman married to a man with a subsisting lawful marriage, a marriage declared void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, could be considered a "wife" for purposes of Section 125. The Court held that such a marriage is void ab initio, the term "wife" in Section 125 applies only to a legally wedded wife, and personal law cannot be excluded to expand its meaning. Consequently, the appellant was not entitled to maintenance and the appeal was dismissed.

Issues considered

The validity of a Hindu marriage entered into when the husband already has a living wife under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Whether a woman in such a void marriage qualifies as a "wife" under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
The extent to which personal law can be excluded in interpreting Section 125.
The applicability of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act to the present marriage.
The relevance of estoppel when the husband treated the appellant as his wife.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 125
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955s. 11, s. 12, s. 14, s. 16, s. 4, s. 5(i)

Subjects

maintenanceSection 125 CrPCHindu Marriage Actvoid marriagedefinition of wifepersonal lawnullityestoppel

Judgment

SMT. YAMUNABAI ANANTRAO ADHAV A
v.
ANANTRAO SHIVRAM ADHAV AND ANOTHER

JANUARY 27, 1988

[RANGANATH MISRA AND LALIT MOHAN SHARMA, JJ.I B

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 125-Hindu woman
marrying a Hindu man having a lawfully wedded wife-Whether
entitled to maintenance-Personal law of the party-Whether can be
excluded-Expression 'wife'-Meaning of.

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Sections 4, 5(i), 11, 12, 14, 16-
c
Hindu woman marrying a Hindu man having a lawfully wedded wife-
Whether such marriage valid-Effect of such marriage-Whether such
woman entitled to maintenance under s. 125 Cr. P.C., 1973.

Words and Phrases: Expression 'wife'-Meaningof. D

The appellant was married to the first respondent by observance
of rites under Hindu Law in June, 1974, while the first respondent's
earlier marriage was subsisting and the wife was alive. After living with
the first respondent for a week, she left the house alleging ill-treatment.
She filed an application for maintenance in 1976, which was dismissed E
by the trial Court. Her appeal to the High Court was dismissed by a Full
Bench.

In the appeal to this Court it was urged on behalf of the appellant
that a marriage should not be treated as void because such a marriage
was earlier recognised in law and custom and in any event, the marriage F
/"'-would be voidable under s. 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, that the
term "wife" ins. 125 of the Cr. P.C., 1973 should be given a wider and
extended meaning so as to include therein not only a lawfully wedded
wife but also a woman married, in fact, by performance or necessary
rites or following the procedure laid down under the law, that the
personal law of the parties to a proceeding under s. 125 of the Cr. P.C. G
should be excluded from consideration, and since a divorcee has been
held to be entitled to the benefits of the section, a woman in the same
position as the appellant should also be brought within the sweep of the
section, and since the appellant was not informed about the respon-
dent's earlier marriage, when she married him, who treated her as his
wife, her prayer for maintenance should be allowed. H
809
810 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1988] 2 S.C.R.

A It was contended on behalf of the respondent that the term "wife"
used in Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. meant only a legally wedded wife,
and as the marriage of the appellant must be held to be null and void by
reason of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage, Act, 1955 the appellant
was not entitled to any relief under the section.
B
Dismissing the appeal,

HELD: 1. The marriage of a woman in accordance with the
Hindu rites with a man having legal spouse, after coming into force of
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is a complete nullity in the eye of law and
she is not entitled to the benefit.of Sec. 125 of the Criminal Procedure \..
c Code, 1973. [813D] J
2.1 Clause (l)(i) of s. 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, lays down,
for a lawful marriage, the necessary condition that neither party should
have a spouse living at the time of the marriage, and therefore a
D marriage in contravention of this condition is null and void, under
section 11 of the Act. [813G]

2.2 By reason of the overriding effect of the Act, as mentioned in
s. 4, no aid c11n be taken of the earlier Hindu law or any custom or usage
11-s a par~ of that law, inconsistent with any provisions of the Act. Section
E 12 is confined_ to other categories of marriages, and is not applicable to
one solemnized in violation of s. S(l)(i) of the Act. Cases covered under
section 12 are not void ab initio. [813H; 814A-B]

2.3 The marriage covered bys. 11 are void-ipso·jure, that is, void
from the very inception, and have to be ignored as not existing in law at
all if and when such a question arises. Although the section permits a-41
F formal declaration to be made on the presentation of a petition, it is not
esseptial to obtain in,advance such a formal declaration from a court in
a proceeding specifically commenced for the purpose. [814B-C]

The marriage of the appellant must, therefore, be treated as null
G and void from its very inception, [815C] ~-

. 3.1 Section 125 has been enacted in the interest of a wife, and one _) ~
who intends to take benefit under sub-section (l)(a) has to establish the 'I
necessary conditiol), namely, that she is the wife of the person con-
cerned. This issue can be decided only by a reference to the law appli-
H cable to the parties. [SISE]
• ,y
SMT. YAMUNABA!v. ANANTRAO 811

3.2 It is only where an applicant establishes her status or relation· A
ship with reference to the Personal Law that an application for mainte-
~ nance can be maintained. Once the right under the section is established
by proof of necessary conditions mentioned therein, it cannot be
defeated by further reference to the Personal Law. [816D·EI
B
3.3 For the purpose of extending the benefit of the section to a
'Y divorced woman, and an illegitimate child, the Parliament considered it
necessary to include in the section specific provisions to that effect but
t has not done so with respect to women not lawfully married. [816F)

•
mff,i ! 3.4 The word "wife" is not defined in the Cr. P.C. except indi·
-r eating in the Explanation to s. 125 its inclusive character so as to cover a
divorcee. A woman cannot be a divorcee, unless there was a marriage in
c
-.( the eye of law preceding that s~tus. The expression must, therefore, be
given the meaning in which it is understood in law .applicable to the
parties, subject to the Explanation (b). A divorcee is included in the
section on account of cl. (b) of the Explanation. [815D· EI
D
3.5 Principle of estoppel cannot be relied upon to defeat the
provisions of the Act. So far as the first respondent treating her as wife
is concerned, it is of no avail, as the issue has to be settled under the
law. It is the intention of the legislature, which is relevant, and not the
attitude of the parties. The prayer of the appellant for maintenance E
cannot, therefore, be allowed even if the appellant was not informed,
at the time of her marriage, to the respondent, about his earlier
marriage. [816G-H]

'~ Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Skah Bano Beghum, [1985) 3 SCR 844,
~ distinguished. F

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal
No. 475 of 1983.

From the Judgment and Order dated 21/22-4-1982 of the
Bombay High Court in Crl. Appln. No. 478of1980.
G
A.K. Sanghi for the Appellant.

A.M. Khanwilkar for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
H
812 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1988] 2 S.C.R.

A SHARMA, J. The point involved in this appeal is whether a
Hindu woman who is married after coming into force of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 to a Hindu male having a living lawfully wedded
wife can maintain an application for maintenance under section 125 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the
Code). The appellant Smt. Yamunabai was factually married to
B
respondent no. 1 Anantrao Shivram Adhav by observance of rites
under Hindu Law in June, 1974. Anantrao had earlier married one y-
Smt. Lilabai who was alive and the marriage was subsisting in 1974.
The appellant lived with the respondent no. 1 for a week and there-
•
+
after left the house alleging ill-treatment. She made an application for
I
maintenance in 1976 which was dismissed. The matter was taken to the
c Bombay High Court, where the case was heard by a Full Bench, and )-
·~ •
was decided against the appellant by the impugned judgment.
~··
2. Section 125 of the Code by sub-section (1) which reads as
follows clothes the "wife" with the right to receive maintenance is a
summary proceeding under the Code:
D
125(1). If any person having sufficient means neglects or
refuses to maintain-

(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or
E (b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether mar-
ried or not, unable to maintain itself, or

(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married
daughter) who has attained majority, where such child
is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or·~ .·
F injury unable to maintain itself, or

(d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or
\
herself,

a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such
G neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly
allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child,
father or mother, at such monthly rate not exceeding five
hundred rupees in the whole, as such Magistrate thinks fit,
and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may
from time to time direct:
H
SMT. YAMUNABAI v. ANANTRAO (SHARMA, J.J 813
-y Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of
A
a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such
>- allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate
is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child if
married is not possessed of sufficient means.

Explanation. For the purposes of this chapter: B
"'(
(a) "minor" means a person who, under the provisions of
... ~
the Indian Majority Act, 1875 (9 of 1875), is deemed
not to have attained his majority;

1 (b) "wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by, or
c
has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not
-( remarried."

According to the respondent the term 'wife' used in the section means
only a legally wedded wife, and as the marriage of the appellant must
be held to be null and void by reason of the provisions of the H;ndu D
Marriage Act, 1955, she is not entitled to any relief under the section.

3. For appreciating the status of a Hindu woman marrying a
Hindu male with a living spouse some of the provisions of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) have to be

- examined. Section 11 of the Act declares such a marriage as null and
void in the following terms:

"11. Void marriages-Any marriage solemnized
after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void
and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto
E

against the other party, be so declared by a decree of F
nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified
in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5."

Clause (l)(i) of s. 5 lays down, for a lawful marriage, the necessary
condition that neither party should have a spouse living at the time of
the marriage. A marriage in contravention of this condition, therefore, G
is null and void. It was urged on behalf of the appellant that a marriage
should not be treated as void because such a marriage was earlier
recognised in law and custom. A reference was made to s. 12 of the
Act and it was said that in any event the marriage would be voidable.
There is no merit in this contention. By reason of the overriding effect
of the Act as mentioned in s. 4, no aid can be taken of the earlier H
814 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1988) 2 S.C.R.

A Hindu Law or any custom or usage as a part of that Law inconsistent
with any provision of the Act. So far as s. 12 is concerned, it is con-
fined to other categories of marriage and is not applicable to one
solemnised in violation of s. S(l)(i) of the Act. Sub-section (2) of s. 12
puts further restrictions on such a right. The cases covered by this
B section are not void ab initio, and unless all the conditions mentioned
therein are fulfilled and the aggrieved party exercises the right to avoid
it, the same continues to be effective. The marriages covered bys. 11 y-
are void-ipso-jure, that is, void from the very inception, and have to be
ignored as not existing in law at all if and when such a question arises. ./..
Although the section permits a formal declaration to be made on the ~

presentation of a petition, it is not essential to obtain in advance such a '
C formal declaration from a court in a proceeding specifically
commenced for the purpose. The provisions of s. 16, which is quoted
t
below, also throw light on this aspect: ~-

"16. Legitimacy of children of void and voidable
marriages.-(1) Notwithstanding that a marriage is null
D
and void under Section 11, any child of such marriage who
would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid,
shall be legitimate, whether such child is born before or
after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amend-
ment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), and whether or not a decree of
nullity is granted in respect of that marriage under this Act

-
and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise
than on a petition under this Act.

(2) Where a decree of nullity is granted in respect of a
voidable marriage under Section 12, any child begotten or
conceived before the decree is made, who would have bee~
F
the legitimate child of the parties of the marriage if at the
date of the decree it had been dissolved instead of being \I
annulled, shall be deemed to be their legitimate child not-
withstanding the decree of nullity.

(3) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) or sub--
G section (2) shall be construed as conferring upon any child
of a marriage which is null and void or which is annulled by
a decree of nullity under Section 12, any rights in or to the
property of any person, other than the parents, in any case
where, but for the passing of this Act, such child would
have been incapable of possessing or acquiring any such
H
SMT. YAMUNABAI v. ANANTRAO !SHARMA, J.J 815
-y rights by reason of his not being the legitimate child of his A
parents."
(Emphasis added).

Sub-section (1), by using the words underlined above clearly,
implies that a void marriage can be held to be so without a prior formal
declaration by a court in a proceeding. While dealing with cases B
covered by s. 12, sub-section (2) refers to a decree of nullity as an
essential condition and sub-section (3) prominently brings out the
basic difference in the character of void and voidable marriages as
covered respectively by ss. 11 and 12. It is also to be seen that while the
legislature has considered it advisable to uphold the legitimacy of the
paternity of a child born out of a void marriage, it has not extended a
similar protection in respect of the mother of the child. The marriage
c
of the appellant must, therefore, be treated as null and void from its
very inception.

4. The question, then arises as to whether the expression 'wife'
used ins. 125 of the Code should be interpreted to mean only a legally D
wedded wife not covered by s. 11 of the Act. The word is not defined
in the Code except indicating in the Explanation its inclusive character
so as to cover a divorcee. A woman cannot be a divorcee unless there
was a marriage in the eye of law preceding that status. The expression
must, therefore, be given the meaning in which it is understood in law
applicable to the parties, subject to the Explanation (b), which is not E
relevant in the present context.
'
5. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the term
'wife' in s. 125 of the Code should be given a wider and extended
~eaning so as to include therein not only a lawfully wedded wife but
' also a woman married in fact by performance of necessary rites or F
( following the procedure laid down under the law. Relying upon the
decision of this Court in Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Beghum,
[1985] 3 SCR 844, it was argued that the personal law of the parties to a
proceeding under s. 125 of the Code should be completely excluded
-. ; from consideration. The relationship of husband and wife comes to an
end on divorce, but a divorcee has been held to be entitled to the G
benefits of the section, it was urged, and therefore applying this
approach a woman in the same position as the present appellant should
be brought within the sweep of the section. We are afraid, the argu-
ment is not well founded. A divorcee is included within the section on
account of clause (b) of the Explanation. The position under the cor-
responding s. 488 of the Code of 1898 was different. A divorcee could H
816 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1988] 2 S.C.R.

A not avail of the summary remedy. The wife's right to maintenance T
depended upon the continuance of her married status. It was pointed
out in Shah Bano's case that since that right could be defeated by the
husband by divorcing her unilaterally under the Muslim Personal Law
or by obtaining a decree of divorce under any other system of law, it
B was considered desirable to remove the hardship by extending the
benefit of the provisions of the section to a divorced woman so long as
she did not remarry, and that was achieyed by including clause (b) of r
the Explanation. Unfortunately for the appellant no corresponding
provision was brought in so as to apply to her. The legislature decided
to bestow the benefit of the section even on an illegitimate child by .
express words but none are found to apply to a de facto wife where the \ ,
c marriage is void ab initio. f .
6. The attempt to exclude altogether the personal law applicable ~
to the parties from consideration also has to be repelled. The section I
has been enacted in the interest of a wife, and one who intends to take
benefit under sub-section (l)(a) has to establish the necessary condi-
D
tion, namely, that she is the wife of the person concerned. This issue
can be decided only by a reference to the law applicable to the parties.
It is only where an applicant establishes her status on relationship with
reference to the personal law that an application for maintenance can
be maintained. Once the right under the section is established by proof
E
of necessary conditions mentioned therein, it cannot be defeated by y
further reference to the personal law. The issue whether the section is
attracted or not cannot be answered except by the reference to the
appropriate law governing the parties. In our view the judgment in
Shah Bano's case does not help the appellant. It may be observed that
for the purpose of extending the benefit of the section to a divorced
woman and an illegitimate child the Parliament considered it necessary-s;-·
F to include in the section specific provisions to that effect, but has not \
done so with respect to women not lawfully married. r
7. Lastly it was urged that the appellant was not informed about
the respondent's marriage with Lilabai when she married the respon-
dent who treated her as his wife, and, therefore, her prayer for mainte-
G nance should be allowed. There is no merit in this point either. The
appellant cannot rely on the principle of estoppel so as to defeat the
provisions of the Act. So far as the respondent treating her as his wife
is concerned, it is again of no avail as the issue has to be settled under
the law. It is the intention of the legislature which is relevant and not
the attitude of the party.
H
SMT. YAMUNABAI v. ANANTRAO (SHARMA, J.] 817

8. We, therefore, hold that the marriage of a woman in accord- A
ance with the Hindu rites with a man having a living spouse is a comp-
lete nullity in the eye of law and she is not entitled to the benefit of
s. 125 of the Code. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There will be
no order as to costs. During the pendency of the appeal in this Court
some money was paid to the appellant in pursuance of an interim B
order. The respondent shall not be permitted to claim for its refund.

N.P.V. Appeal dismissed.