Recent Posts
-
ELECTORAL BONDS SCHEME DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE SC -
Hindu Marriage cannot be dissolved by compromise under sec 125 Cr. P.C -
WHAT IS THE PUNISHMENT IN CHEQUE BOUNCE CASE? -
How Do I Write A Complaint Letter To The Cyber Cell ? -
REGISTRATION OF LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP -
IN WHICH COUNTRIES ABORTION IS LEGAL? -
How To Recover Your Loaned Money ?
Hindu Marriage cannot be dissolved by compromise under sec 125 Cr. P.C
The Allahabad High Court in a recent judgment stated about the scope of section 125 crpc. Divorce by settlement cannot be claimed under this section. The Court stated that this section is limited to the maintenance payment to the deserted wife. Here, the Court only has the power to determine the amount of maintenance. So, the court cannot grant divorce under this section. The parties by their consent also cannot expand the jurisdiction of the court to confer the power to pass a decree of divorce. The parties cannot confer jurisdiction on a court if the court otherwise does not have jurisdiction
Facts of the case:
Bhojraj Singh worked as an assistant teacher at Maharaja Tej Singh Junior High School, Aurandh, Vikash Khand Sultanganj, District Mainpuri. He retired on June 30, 2012, and died on October 2, 2021. The petitioner or appellant appeared. The case involves the payment of a family pension for a woman who has been married to the late Bhojraj Singh and has lived with him for several years. The petitioner-appellant argued that Bhojraj Singh’s marriage to contesting private respondent Usha Devi did not work out due to matrimonial disputes and they separated. Usha Devi initiated a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which led to a compromise and the parties’ separation. It was argued that Usha Devi had no legal rights against the deceased employee after their separation. The deceased employee married the present petitioner-appellant. Various documents have been used to prove the fact of marriage. The petitioner-appellant presented a claim of Usha Devi’s second marriage, which the private respondent disputes. The appellant claimed to have obtained a succession certificate and used it to claim a family pension, but the authorities rejected their claim. The writ petition challenging the order has also been dismissed.
The Single Judge ruled that Bhojraj Singh and Usha Devi’s marriage could only be dissolved through a competent court decree, and cannot be annulled under Section 125 Cr. P.C. as divorce under section 125 cannot be done. The appellant’s claim based on a second marriage was rejected. The appellant, the later wife, filed an appeal after being dissatisfied with the single judge’s decision.
Issue:
Whether Bhojraj Singh and Usha Devi’s marriage be dissolved through a compromise under Section 125 Cr.P.C.?
Legal provision:
Section 125 of the CRPC establishes a secular law for the maintenance of wife, child, or parents. This section aids in providing monetary assistance to the vulnerable, thereby avoiding situations such as vagrancy and poverty. So, objectively, the CRPC’s maintenance clause seeks to advance social justice and protect vulnerable people who are unable to provide for themselves.
Judgment:
The Court held that the parties are Hindus and their marriage will follow the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. The late Bhojraj Singh and Usha Devi were capable of forming a marriage alliance, which they did. the marriage between the parties is governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, of 1955, and can only be dissolved through a court decree. No competent court has ever issued such a decree. The parties’ marriage could not have been dissolved based solely on an alleged compromise. The appellant’s counsel relies on the Supreme Court’s decision in Deoki Panjhiyara in which the appellant claimed that the first marriage was void because the other party was already married to Rohit Kumar Mishra and the second marriage was performed during the previous marriage, which was void. After identifying the conditions of a valid marriage, the Court determined that if the previous marriage was void, a competent court declaration of nullity or annulment was not necessary.
Bhojraj Singh and Usha Devi’s marriage was their first, and neither party was deemed incapable of contracting it. The nullity of the marriage plea does not apply in this case. The respondents dispute the claim that Usha Devi contracted marriage after a certain point in time.
The Sharks of Law teaches people about legal issues and fosters critical thinking. We provide Legal Consultation. You can find a lawyer here.