Woman Living With Man For Long Without Marriage Entitled To Allowance After Separation: Madhya Pradesh HC

The court ruling came from a bench of Justice JS Ahluwalia while dismissing a petition by a 38-year-old man, who reportedly was ordered by the trial court to pay a monthly allowance of Rs 1,500 to the woman he had lived with.

About the trial court ruling

Challenging the trial court's order to pay an allowance to Anita on the ground that she could not prove if they had got married in a temple, the petitioner Shailesh Bopche filed a petition to the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

As per reports, the trial court had also provided a finding that the marriage between Shailesh and Anita did not happen at a temple. However, as Anita had a child with Shailesh, the trial court earlier ruled that she was legally entitled to an allowance.

"The trial court has not given a specific finding that the respondent is not the legally wedded wife of the applicant. However, the findings are that the respondent could not prove the rituals as well as the fact that, marriage was performed in the temple but later on trial court has given a finding that since the applicant and respondent were living as husband and wife for a considerable long time and the respondent has also given birth to a child, therefore respondent is entitled for maintenance," the trial court had said in its order.

What did Madhya Pradesh HC say?

Justice Ahluwalia, upholding the trial court's order on Saturday, noted that the only "bone of contention" of the petitioner's lawyer is that since the "respondent is not the legally wedded wife, (the) application under Section 125 of CrPc is not maintainable".

Notably, Section 125 of CrPc states that if a person with adequate means, refuses to maintain his wife, who is unable to maintain herself, then such a person would be required to pay a monthly allowance.

"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 CrPC," the Madhya Pradesh High Court said.