A second marriage is void if the first marriage has not been legally dissolved, blocking maintenance claims under Section 125.

O R D E R

Revision petitioner is the petitioner in M.C.No.9/98 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Thalassery. She preferred the above petition before the lower court seeking an order for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure . It was contended by the revision petitioner that on 01.04.1992, the respondent married the revision petitioner in accordance with the customary rites and after marriage, they had been residing together as husband and wife and that on 29.05.1997, the revision petitioner was taken to the house of her sister at Azhiyoor and the respondent went away. Thereafter, the revision petitioner was not provided any maintenance and that the revision petitioner had no source of income for her maintenance. Whereas, the respondent was employed as a medical representative and earning Rs.5,000/- per month. In addition to that, he had landed properties whereby an income of Rs.24,000/- was obtained per annum. With this pleadings the revision petitioner sought for an order directing the respondent to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/-.

2. The respondent entered appearance and denied the marital relationship and further contended that the revision petitioner is the wife of one Krishnan and that two children were born out of their wedlock and that one of the sons is well employed and that the respondent is not liable to maintain the revision petitioner and that the revision petitioner had to seek maintenance from her husband or son and that the revision petitioner is getting monthly income of Rs.5,000/- from her landed properties and that the respondent is devoid of any property to get an earning of Rs.24,000/- and that he is married and had to maintain his wife and child and prayed for dismissal of the petition. It was also alleged by the respondent that the revision petitioner was employed as servant at the house of the respondent and since she was sent out by his mother, she was ill motivated and filed this petition.

3. On the side of the revision petitioner, herself and 2 other witnesses were examined as PWs 1 to 3. Exts.P1 to P5 were also marked. On the other hand, the respondent was examined as CPW1. Two other witnesses were also examined on his side. Exts.D1 to D12 were marked.

4. The learned Magistrate on appraisal of the evidence arrived a finding that Ext.P1 would establish that the petitioner is married to one Krishnan and so, she is not entitled to get an order for maintenance against the respondent. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Assailing that order, this revision petition was preferred.

The point that raised for consideration is:- Whether the impugned order is vitiated by any error, illegality or impropriety.

5. The point : In the petition, it was alleged that the revision petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. When she was examined, she had deposed that she had earlier married to one Krishnan and that marital relationship was dissolved. In proof of that version, Ext.P1 agreement dated 17.08.1990 was executed. It was further deposed that thereafter on 01.04.1992, the respondent married the revision petitioner. Admittedly Ext.P1 agreement is subsequent to the commencement of the amendment to Hindu Marriage Act and on the date of Ext.P1 no customary dissolution of the marriage is permitted by law. It is also crucial to note that her marriage with Krishnan was suppressed in the petition. But the respondent alleged it. It is in this background the revision petitioner admitted her marriage with Krishnan and brought forward Ext.P1 with a plea that the earlier marriage was dissolved. The dissolution now brought in evidence is without the plea. Petitioner had suppressed material fact regarding her marital tie with Krsihnan. When it was felt that she could not suppress it any longer, dissolution through Ext.P1 is brought. Ext.P1 is not legally valid. In the circumstances, no reliance can be given to Ext.P1 to arrive a conclusion tha