Permanent and Interim Maintenance in Void Marriages: Legal Rights & Provisions

Introduction

Marriage is considered a sacred institution in India, governed by various legal provisions. However, not all marriages are legally valid. Some marriages are declared void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA). When a marriage is declared void, the question arises whether the spouse is entitled to maintenance and alimony. The recent Supreme Court judgment in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025) has brought significant clarity to this issue, emphasizing that referring to a woman in a void marriage as an “illegitimate wife” or a “faithful mistress” is a violation of her fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Understanding Void Marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

A void marriage is one that is considered null and void from the beginning. Under Section 11 of the HMA, the following marriages are void:

1. Bigamous Marriages – If one or both parties to the marriage already have a spouse living at the time of marriage.

2. Marriages within Prohibited Degrees of Relationship – If the parties are within the degrees of prohibited relationship unless permitted by custom or usage.

3. Marriages between Sapindas – If the parties are sapindas of each other unless allowed by custom or tradition.

In such cases, the marriage does not have any legal standing. However, issues related to maintenance and alimony still arise, which is where Sections 24 and 25 of the HMA come into play.

Permanent Alimony and Maintenance under Section 25 of HMA

Section 25 of the HMA allows courts to grant permanent alimony and maintenance even in cases of void marriages. The key aspects of this provision include:

1. A spouse of a void marriage is entitled to seek permanent maintenance.

2. The grant of maintenance is discretionary and depends on the facts of each case.

3. The conduct of the parties plays a crucial role in determining maintenance.

4. The remedy under Section 25 is distinct from the remedy under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which is meant for legally wedded wives.

Interim Maintenance under Section 24 of HMA

Section 24 of the HMA allows for interim (pendente lite) maintenance. The Supreme Court in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur held that:

1. A spouse can seek maintenance while the proceedings for declaring the marriage void are pending.

2. The court must determine whether the spouse seeking maintenance has sufficient independent income.

3. The court can grant maintenance despite the marriage being void, as long as the conditions under Section 24 are met.

4. The conduct of the spouse seeking relief is considered before granting interim maintenance.

The Supreme Court’s Judgment in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025)

The Supreme Court in this case dealt with two key issues:

1. Whether a spouse in a void marriage can claim permanent maintenance under Section 25 of HMA?

   • The Court ruled in favor, holding that the right to maintenance does not depend on the morality of the bigamous marriage.

2. Whether a spouse in a void marriage can claim interim maintenance under Section 24 of HMA?

   • The Court ruled that interim maintenance can be granted if the spouse does not have independent income and the petition for declaring the marriage void is pending.

The Court also emphasized the importance of treating spouses in void marriages with dignity and rejected derogatory terms such as “illegitimate wife” or “faithful mistress.”

Distinction Between Section 25 of HMA and Section 125 of CrPC

The judgment also clarified the differences between maintenance under Section 25 of HMA and Section 125 of CrPC:

• Section 25 of HMA

  1. Applies to both husband and wife.

  2. Can be claimed by a spouse in a void marriage.

  3. Relief is discretionary.

• Section 125 of CrPC

  1. Provides a quick and summary remedy.

  2. Does not apply to a spouse in a void marriage.

  3. Relief is limited to legally wedded wives.

Earlier Precedents and Their Interpretation in This Case

1. Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav (1988)

   1. The Court previously held that a spouse in a void marriage cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC.

   2. However, in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur, the Court distinguished between the remedies under Section 125 CrPC and Section 25 of HMA.

2. Bhausaheb @ Sandhu s/o Raghuji Magar v. Leelabai w/o Bhausaheb Magar (2004)

   1. The Bombay High Court referred to a wife in a void marriage as an “illegitimate wife” or “faithful mistress.”

   2. The Supreme Court in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur condemned such terminology and held that it violated the fundamental rights of women under Article 21.

Legal Rights of Spouses in Void Marriages

The ruling reaffirms that:

1. A spouse in a void marriage is entitled to claim maintenance.

2. Courts have discretion in granting alimony and maintenance.

3. The dignity and rights of a spouse in a void marriage must be upheld.

4. Maintenance can be granted even if the marriage is null and void under Section 11 of HMA.

Conclusion

The judgment in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur is a landmark ruling that strengthens the rights of spouses in void marriages. It ensures that they are not left without financial support and that their dignity is protected. By allowing maintenance under Sections 24 and 25 of HMA, the Supreme Court has provided crucial legal safeguards for individuals trapped in void marriages. The decision underscores the importance of treating such spouses with dignity and respect, upholding their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.