The Allahabad High Court has declared that the dissolution of marriage between two Hindus must adhere strictly to the procedures outlined in the Hindu Marriage Act. It was emphasized that unilateral declarations made on stamp papers are not recognized as valid means of dissolution.
In a recent case presided over by Justice Subhash Vidyarthi, a Criminal Revision petition was addressed. The petition involved a husband disputing the family court’s decision to grant his wife maintenance of Rs. 2200 per month under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The husband argued that the couple had mutually agreed to divorce according to local customs 14 years prior, a fact that was not disclosed by the wife during her application for maintenance. As evidence, the husband presented an alleged divorce agreement unilaterally drafted by the wife on a Rs. 10 stamp paper, with multiple witnesses.
The court underscored that Hindu marriages cannot be dissolved through unilateral declarations on a Rs. 10 stamp paper, as it does not adhere to legally recognized methods of dissolution. Consequently, the marriage remained intact, and the wife was deemed legally wedded to the petitioner.
Regarding the 14-year delay in invoking Section 125 CrPC, the court noted that the law does not impose a specific time limit for seeking maintenance. The wife’s application was initially filed in 2011, but her pursuit was hindered by personal tragedy following her brother’s passing.
Additionally, the court took into account the wife’s decision to live separately from her husband due to his cohabitation with another woman without a formal dissolution of their marriage. This circumstance was considered sufficient justification for the wife’s separate residence.
“…when the marriage between the revisionist and the opposite party has not been dissolved by any manner known to law, it continues to subsist and the respondent having married another lady and having procreated three children from her, has given rise to a reasonable cause to the opposite party to live separate from the revisionist,” the Court remarked.
Additionally, the Court highlighted that as per the Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Swapan Kumar Banerjee v. State of West Bengal (2020), a wife maintains the entitlement to submit an application under Section 125 CrPC even following the dissolution of her marriage. Taking these circumstances into account, the Court upheld the Family Court’s ruling, confirming the order for the husband to provide Rs. 2200 per month as maintenance to his wife. As a result, the husband’s petition for revision was rejected.
