231 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRR(F)-1111-2024 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 07.07.2025 Ramandeep Kaur ....Petitioner(s)

Versus Gurpreet Singh .....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI Present: Ms. Gehna Vaishnavi, Legal Aid Counsel, for the petitioner.

Mr. Vinod Khunger, Advocate for the respondent.

****

JASGURPREET SINGH PURI , J. (Oral)

1. The present revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 23.05.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ferozepur, whereby the petition filed by the petitioner-wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner who is a Legal Aid Counsel appointed by this Court submitted that it is a case where the petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband solemnized marriage with each other and this is second marriage of both of them and the marriage between the present petitioner and respondent has not been disputed anywhere. She submitted that she had led the entire evidence to show before the learned Judge, Family Court that she has been neglected by the respondent-husband and he has not paid any maintenance to her despite the fact that he was earning a handsome amount of money, whereas the petitioner has no source of income.

However, the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C has been dismissed and maintenance has been denied to the present petitioner who is the wife only on the ground that her earlier marriage was not dissolved by a decree of divorce passed by the Court of law and rather only a panchayati divorce has taken place which has got no sanctity under the law. She submitted that rather from the present wedlock i.e. the wedlock of the petitioner and the respondent, a child was born who is in the care and custody of the present petitioner and they have cohabited with each other after the marriage between the parties took place in the year 2019. She further submitted that the claim of the petitioner for grant of maintenance has been rejected erroneously on the ground that her earlier marriage was not dissolved, whereas she was able to prove the marriage with the respondent and also the fact that they have cohabited with each other. She submitted that rather the respondent-husband was also earlier married and the fact regarding first marriage and regarding divorce of petitioner-wife was within the knowledge of the respondent-husband. In this regard, she referred to a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. N. Usha Rani and another Vs. Moodududla Srinivas” 2025(2) RCR (Civil) 1, and submitted that a woman can claim maintenance from her second husband under Section 125 Cr.P.C even if her first marriage is not dissolved through a legal decree, provided she is de facto separated from her first husband and not deriving any rights or entitlements from the first marriage. She submitted that in the present case the petitioner-wife was earlier married and her marriage was not dissolved but the same itself per se cannot become a ground for denial of maintenance in view of the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court. She also referred to a judgment of Chhattisgarh High Court in Criminal Revision No.755 of 2021 titled as Ashok Srivastava Vs. Anju Samudri Shrivastava, decided on

12.10.2022 in this regard.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-husband submitted that the matter was sent to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court but the same has failed. He submitted that in case the proposition of law is as aforesaid, then he has no objection in case the matter is remanded back to the learned Judge, Family Court for deciding the petition on mertis.

4. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

5. When the petitioner filed a petition for grant of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C before the learned Judge, Family Court, she has been denied maintenance only on the ground that she was earlier married and her earlier marriage ha