The court in this case did not categorically hold that where the wife deserts the husband without sufficient cause, she is disentitled from claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Instead, the court clarified that the entitlement to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is based on the subsistence of marriage and certain conditions, such as living in adultery or refusing to live with the husband without sufficient reason, which are applicable only when the marriage is still subsisting (!) (!) .

Furthermore, the court emphasized that even after a decree of divorce has been granted on the ground of desertion, the woman continues to enjoy the status of a wife for the limited purpose of claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., due to the provisions of Explanation (b) to sub-section (1) of that section (!) (!) (!) . The court acknowledged that the marriage relationship has ended by the decree of divorce, but the woman still retains certain rights to claim maintenance as a divorced woman unless she has remarried or is living in adultery, which are specific exceptions (!) (!) .

Therefore, the court's position is that desertion alone does not automatically disqualify a woman from claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., especially when she has been legally divorced and has not remarried or engaged in adultery.