Courts Hearing Maintenance Applications Under Domestic Violence Act Or S.125 CrPC Need Not Go Into Validity Of Marriage: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that courts while dealing with maintenance applications under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act or Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C), should not go into the validity of marriage.

A single judge bench of Justice S Rachaiah sitting at Kalaburagi bench confirmed the trial Court's order directing petitioner's husband to pay Rs 3,000, per month as maintenance.

The appellate court had, after re-appreciating the case, arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner had failed to establish that she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. As such, the appellate Court allowed the appeal filed by the husband challenging the trial court order and had set aside the order of maintenance.

The petitioner submitted that the appellate Court has committed an error by exceeding its jurisdiction to decide the legality of the marriage or otherwise. The petitioner has an election voter Identity Card, which clearly indicates that the respondent is the husband of the petitioner, she submitted.

On going through the records the bench said the Appellate Court ought not to have gone into the validity of the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent, unless the validity of marriage is challenged by the respondent before the appropriate Court and it is nullified by the competent Court having jurisdiction to pass such order.

It observed,

“The Courts while dealing with the maintenance matters, either under Section 12 of the Act or under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. should not go into the validity of the marriage. However, the Court may peruse the evidence of the wife as to whether she is able to maintain herself or not.”

It added, “Once the trial Court appreciated the evidence and passed an order of maintenance, the appellate Court may either modify it or set aside the same in case it is found that the wife is able to maintain herself. If any order passed by the appellate Court regarding the validity of the marriage or otherwise, it dehors its jurisdiction.”

Case Title: Sharnavva @Kasturi and Shivappa

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.200044 OF 2018

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 186

Date of Order: 18-04-2023

Appearance: Advocate Mahantesh Patil for petitioner.

Advocate Ratna N Shivayogimath for respondent.

Click Here To Read/Download Order