'One Or Two Lapses Not Same As Living In Adultery': Patna HC Upholds Maintenance To Wife, Daughter
Last Updated:
The court rejected a plea by the husband that his wife was living in adultery with her brother-in-law, so she was not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC
The Patna High Court has said that adulterous life is no doubt a disqualification for any wife to get maintenance from her husband under Section 125 CrPC; however, any physical relationship of a lady with any person prior to her marriage does not come within the definition of 'adultery" because adultery is an offence against one's spouse.
A single-judge bench of Jitendra Kumar said the adulterous life of any wife subsequent to her marriage is undoubtedly a disqualification for any married wife to get maintenance from her husband.
'However, 'living in adultery' denotes a continuous course of conduct and not isolated acts of immorality. One or two lapses from virtues may be acts of adultery, but would not be sufficient to show that the woman was 'living in adultery'. A few moral lapses and a return to a normal life can not be said to be living in adultery. If the lapse is continued and followed up by a further adulterous life, the woman can be said to be 'living in adultery'," the bench said.
The court rejected a plea by the husband that his wife was living in adultery with her brother-in-law, so she was not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC.
Even the plea of the petitioner that the woman is now divorced and she is not entitled to get maintenance under Section 125 CrPC was rejected.
'As per Explanation (b) to Section 125(1) CrPC, wife includes even divorced wife and she is entitled to get maintenance under Section 125 CrPC if she has not remarried and it is not a case of the petitioner that his divorced wife has remarried," the bench said.
The bench upheld the order by the Family Court, Bhagalpur, which directed the petitioner to pay Rs 3,000 per month to his wife and Rs 2,000 per month to his daughter towards their maintenance.
It noted that, except for the allegation that his wife was having an illicit relationship with her brother-in-law prior to and subsequent to the marriage, there were no specific details regarding such a life of his wife. Even the conduct of the petitioner/husband during the subsistence of the marriage does not show that he was serious about his allegation, the court said.
The bench pointed out, 'No such allegation has been made in his divorce petition, which was filed not on the ground of adultery but on the ground of cruelty and desertion. Moreover, as per his pleadings, he was always ready to keep his wife with him. Such willingness on the part of a husband is not possible if he believes that his wife has been indulging in an adulterous life. Hence, the petitioner has not proved that his wife was living in adultery."
As per the claim of the wife, her husband-petitioner herein was having an illicit relationship with another lady, and hence, he was subjecting her to ill-treatment/cruelty, and she was constrained to leave her matrimonial home to live at her parental home along with the child.
Even in the divorce proceeding, the petitioner-husband could not prove his allegation of desertion by his wife. Moreover, one criminal case filed by the wife for alleged cruelty is still pending for consideration in the Court of SDJM, Bhagalpur, the bench said.
The petitioner-husband also claimed that he is not the biological father of the minor daughter, as she was born on August 08, 2010, whereas his marriage was solemnised on March 18, 2010, which shows that the girl child was born just after 4 months and 10 days of his marriage.
He claimed the child is not his legitimate daughter and that she, being born out of an illicit relationship of the wife with someone else, is the illegitimate child of another man, and hence, he is not liable to pay any maintenance to her.
On this, the bench, however, said it would be pertinent to point out that as per Section 112 of the Evidence Act, a child born during the continuation of a valid marriage between his/her mother and any man is held to be the legitimate son/daughter of that man, unless it is shown by that man that he had no access to his wife at any time when the child could have been conceived.
Relying upon the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Aparna Ajinkya Firodia Vs Ajinkya Arun Firodia, the court pointed out it was held that birth during the continuance of marriage is 'conclusive proof" of legitimacy unless 'non-access" of the party who questions the paternity of the child at the time the child could have been begotten is proved by the said party.
The court said the girl child was born here during the subsistence of marriage, though it is also not disputed that she was born just after 4 months and 10 days of the marriage.
Hence, in view of the law, as provided in Section 112 of the Evidence Act, 1872, she was presumed to be the legitimate daughter of the petitioner because it had already been found that the marriage between her mother and the petitioner was valid and subsisting. The presumption regarding the paternity could have been rebutted only by the petitioner pleading and proving his non-access to the mother at the time when the child could have been conceived, the bench said.
'But I find that there is no such pleadings and evidence on behalf of the petitioner that before marriage, he had no access to or relationship with the wife, except the bald allegation on his part that his wife was having illicit relationship with her brother-in-law prior and subsequent to the marriage," the judge said.
The court also pointed out that the petitioner has never filed any matrimonial petition before a family court or any civil court regarding a declaration in regard to the paternity of the child.
The bench also rejected the petitioner's plea that the woman was not his legally wedded wife on the ground that his marriage with her was forcibly solemnised.
'However, I find that, as per the evidence, that the marriage was solemnised as per Hindu Rites and Customs at Temple without any application of force. Moreover, I find that the petitioner has never filed any matrimonial petition for annulment of his marriage, either under Section 11 or 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act. I further find that he has filed only a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and it goes without saying that divorce petition is filed by the husband only against his legally wedded wife. Hence, the plea of the petitioner that the woman was not his legally wedded wife, has no substance," the judge said.
The court also emphasised that a strict standard of proof is not required in a proceeding under Section 125 of CrPC, unlike in matrimonial proceedings, where strict proof of marriage or paternity is essential.
top videos
View all
It said, prima facie, the court's satisfaction regarding the parties' marital status and the child's paternity is sufficient to pass an order under Section 125 of CrPC.
It has also been discussed and found that any finding regarding the marital status of the party or paternity of the child in a proceeding under Section 125 CrPC is tentative and not final, and it is always subject to the order of any civil court or family court, which are the competent courts to conclusively decide the marital status of the party or legitimacy or illegitimacy of the child, the bench said.
Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
tags :
Adultery maintenance marriage
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
May 14, 2025, 02:46 IST
News india 'One Or Two Lapses Not Same As Living In Adultery': Patna HC Upholds Maintenance To Wife, Daughter
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
7 days ago
- United News of India
Two minor siblings go missing in Punab
Phagwara (Punjab), June 5 (UNI) Two minor siblings were reported missing late Wednesday under suspicious circumstances from Gobindpura locality of Phagwara, police said, adding they have registered a case against unidentified persons following a complaint lodged by Satish Anand, a migrant labourer hailing from Bihar and a resident of Gobindpura. According to the complaint, Anand and his wife Radha had gone to work on Wednesday morning, leaving their two sons, Shivam (12) and Bambam (10), in the care of their maternal grandmother at their residence in Gobindpura. Upon returning home later in the day, the couple find both children missing. The grandmother, who was supposed to be supervising the children, was reportedly unaware of when or how the boys disappeared, police said. Alarmed by their absence, Anand immediately approached the police, expressing suspicion that the children might have been kidnapped. A police officer said a case has been registered under Section 346 IPC, which deals with the wrongful confinement of a person with the intent to keep him secret or out of public view. 'As of now, no arrests have been made. We are actively investigating all possible angles, including the possibility of abduction. Efforts are underway to trace the missing children. We are also speaking to neighbours and potential witnesses,' said the investigating officer, requesting anonymity. The police have launched a search operation and are examining CCTV footage from the area to gather leads. They have also appealed to the public to come forward with any information that might help in locating the children. UNI GS XC PRS
Time of India
04-06-2025
- Time of India
High courts can't suo motu enhance punishment in appeal: SC
The Supreme Court on Wednesday held high courts cannot exercise suo motu revision powers either to enhance the sentence or to convict an accused on any other charge in the absence of appeal filed by the victim, complainant or the state. A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma passed the verdict on an appeal filed by one Nagarajan, challenging an order of Madurai bench of the Madras High Court which convicted him for abetment of suicide of a woman and sentenced him to five-years rigorous imprisonment. He was also convicted of charges of outraging the modesty and house trespass. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Sistema TMS para empresas de logística Sistema TMS embarcador Saiba Mais Undo The top court noted that the trial court acquitted him of the charges of Section 306 of IPC for abetment of suicide and convicted him only for outraging the modesty of the woman and house trespass. Nagarajan appealed in the high court, which upheld the trial court's order of conviction but suo motu initiated proceedings for his conviction under Section 306 of the IPC and convicted him. Live Events It came on record that no appeal was filed by the state, victim or complainant for enhancement of sentence or acquittal under section 306 of the IPC. "An appeal filed by the accused/convict and in the absence of any appeal filed by the victim, complainant or the state, the high court cannot exercise suo motu revision either to enhance the sentence or to convict the appellant on any other charge," the bench said. As a result, the bench set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 306 of IPC but confirmed his conviction for "outraging the modesty of woman" and "house trespass". "The appellant is directed to undergo the sentence and to pay the fine as imposed by the sessions court," it held. The top court noted that the sentences were ordered to run concurrently by the high court. "Thus, a conviction awarded for offences under Sections 354 and 448 of IPC has also resulted in a conviction under Section 306 of IPC and an enhanced sentence, that too, in an appeal filed by none other than the appellant," it said. According to the bench "the rationale of the above can be explained in simple language by stating that no appellant by filing an appeal can be worse-off than what he was". "That is exactly what we are seeking to reiterate in our judgment having regard to the facts of the present case." Justice Nagarathna, who authored the verdict, said for exercising powers of the appellate court for enhancement of sentence in an appeal filed either by the state or the complainant or the victim, CrPC provides that the appellate court can reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be re-tried by a court competent to try the offence, or alter the finding by maintaining the sentence, or with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, of the sentence so as to enhance or reduce the same. "Thus, the power to enhance the sentence can be exercised by the appellate court only in an appeal filed by the state, victim or complainant, provided the accused has had an opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement," the court held. The bench said that the trial court should also be very careful while passing an order of sentence which must be "concomitant" with the charges framed and the findings arrived at while arriving at a judgment of conviction. Nagarajan had challenged the November 29, 2021 order of the high court. He was accused of outraging the modesty of his neighbour by trespassing her house on July 11, 2003. The woman died by suicide along with her infant, the very next day.
Hindustan Times
04-06-2025
- Hindustan Times
Tarn Taran man held for spying for Pakistan during Operation Sindoor
A man from the border district of Tarn Taran was arrested for allegedly sharing sensitive information about troop deployment and strategic locations during Operation Sindoor with Pakistani intelligence operatives (PIOs), police said on Tuesday. The arrested accused has been identified as Gagandeep Singh alias Gagan, a resident of Mohalla Rodupur in Tarn Taran. He was arrested in a joint operation by counter-intelligence and Taran Taran police, director general of police (DGP) Gaurav Yadav said. A case under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 21 of the Official Secrets Act and Section 152 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) has been registered at the police station city, Tarn Taran, the police officials said. Yadav said that a preliminary investigation has revealed that Gagandeep was in direct contact with Pakistan-based Khalistani supporter Gopal Singh Chawla for the past five years, through whom he was introduced to PIOs. 'Investigations have also revealed that the accused had been sharing classified information, including troop deployments, strategic locations, and army movements during 'Operation Sindoor', posing a serious threat to national security, the DGP added. He said that police teams have recovered two mobile devices from the accused's possession containing sensitive intelligence that he shared with the PIOs, as well as the details of over 20 ISI contacts. The accused has also received payments from PIOs via Indian channels, he said. The DGP said that thorough financial and technical investigations are underway to trace other linkages and establish the full scope of this espionage network. Tarn Taran senior superintendent of police (SSP) Abhimanyu Rana said that acting on specific intelligence from CI, a police team arrested the accused from Muradpura in Tarn Taran, and seized his mobile devices. 'During interrogation, the accused disclosed that he was tasked by ISI handlers to gather sensitive information about deployment in border area, including railway stations and Amritsar city. He was also receiving monetary benefits for espionage activities,' the SSP added. Further investigation is on and more arrests are likely in coming days, he added. Earlier, police had arrested six persons in Punjab for allegedly spying for Pakistan. Falaksher Masih and Suraj Masih were arrested from Ajnala in Amritsar, while 31-year-old woman Guzala and Yameen Mohamad, both residents of Malerkotla, were also nabbed last month. Guzala and Yameen had been receiving payments through online transactions in exchange for sharing classified information. Guzala had been in contact with Ehsan-ur-Rahim alias Danish, an official posted at the Pakistan High Commission. On May 13, India expelled Danish for allegedly indulging in espionage. Two more persons — Sukhpreet Singh and Karanbir Singh — were also arrested by police from Gurdaspur for sharing sensitive military information with Pakistan's ISI.
