In the past, Indian courts frequently handled marriage cases in a formalistic manner. For example, nullities were rigidly applied to marriages that were declared unlawful under the Hindu Marriage Act for grounds such as bigamy or violation of forbidden degrees of connection. This meant that because the law did not recognize the marriage bond in the first place, the spouses in such marriages—who were mostly women—had no right to maintenance or alimony. Yet as the necessity to shield weak spouses from the severe effects of rigid legal formalism has become more apparent, there has been a discernible change in the way judges have thought throughout time. As they concentrate on the larger goal of the law—ensuring justice and preventing destitution—courts are giving social justice a higher priority.
This case revolves around an important question about
maintenance rights in the event of a void marriage under the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955. The Act's Section 25, which specially talks about alimony and
maintenance, is evaluated more broadly in this case. The question arises
whether spouses in marriages that are legally void because of prior marital
connections are covered by this provision's protection has to be addressed by
the court. The decision upheld the legal precept that poverty is the last thing
that the government wants to avoid, guaranteeing that the spouse's financial
stability is maintained even in null and invalid marriages. This ruling
highlights the judiciary's responsibility in striking a balance between the
requirements of social justice and the intricacies of marriage law, with
substantial ramifications for cases that are comparable to it.
This case not only makes clear how broad Section 25 is but also highlights the
reinforcements required in the maintenance laws in India. In the case of
Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur the key question was whether a spouse who had a
void marriage because of past marital relationships may still get maintenance
or alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The court also
deliberated about the applicability in this case of the more expansive reading
of Section 25, which permits maintenance even following a null and void
marriage.
The bench of Justice Vikram Nath and P.B. Varale had conflicting
views on the applicability of sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955
whether alimony can be granted or not as the marriage is void. The court also referred
few precedents and ended up with a conflicting decision.
In order to form a three-judge panel to investigate
the matter, the court ordered that the records be presented to Chief Justice of
India, DY Chandrachud for passing an effective judgement.
REFERENCE-
Post a Comment