A divorce on grounds of desertion does not stop a divorced woman from claiming maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, thus recognizing her entitlement despite earlier payments treated as permanent alimony.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. In this CRLMC, the petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to quash the proceeding initiated before the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur under Section 125 Cr.P.C./Section 144 BNSS, contending that in view of the decree of divorce and prior payments treated as permanent alimony, no further maintenance claim survives.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. The facts of the case are as follows:

(i) The marriage between the petitioner-husband and the opposite party-wife was solemnised on 05.12.2003 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. Matrimonial discord arose shortly thereafter. It is the case of the petitioner that the opposite party left the matrimonial home on 15.01.2004 and did not return despite alleged efforts for restitution of cohabitation.

(ii) In that backdrop, the petitioner instituted MAT Case No. 42 of 2006 on 22.06.2006 before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Berhampur seeking dissolution of marriage. The proceeding was later transferred to the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur and renumbered as C.P. No. 38 of 2010. During pendency, the opposite party was granted pendentelite maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(iii) Upon failure of the petitioner to comply with the maintenance order, his pleading in the matrimonial proceeding was struck off and the divorce petition came to be dismissed. The said development was assailed by the petitioner before this Court in MATA No. 38 of 2015.

(iv) Independently, the opposite party initiated proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. In Cr.P. No. 87 of 2015, the learned Judge, Family Court, Berhampur, by order dated 15.05.2015, awarded maintenance of ₹20,000/- per month in favour of the opposite party.

(v) The petitioner challenged the said order before this Court in RPFAM No. 86/119 of 2017. In the meantime, upon compliance with arrears, the matrimonial proceeding was restored and remanded for adjudication on merits. The opposite party thereafter filed a counter-claim seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(vi) By judgment dated 30.05.2017, the learned Family Court dismissed the petitioner’s prayer for divorce and allowed the counter-claim for restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner preferred MATA No. 99 of 2017 and MATA No. 100 of 2017 challenging the said judgment.

(vii) This Court, by order dated 14.07.2022, dismissed the petitioner’s challenge to the maintenance order and affirmed the grant of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

(viii) Thereafter, by common judgment dated 21.11.2023 in MATA No. 99 of 2017 and MATA No. 100 of 2017, this Court reversed the Family Court’s decision, granted a decree of divorce in favour of the petitioner on the ground of desertion, and observed that the amounts already paid by the husband would constitute permanent alimony.

(ix) The opposite party approached the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 1038 of 2024. From the record, it appears that the grievance raised therein was confined to issues relating to alimony/payment and not to the decree of divorce.

(x) During pendency of the proceedings before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, various directions were issued regarding payment. The petitioner made payments from time to time, including towards arrears of maintenance and other sums as directed.

(xi) The Supreme Court, by order dated 20.08.2024, disposed of the Special Leave Petition, recording that the grievance of the wife pertained to non-payment of alimony and noting that this Court had already granted divorce an