Maintenance, in legal context, refers to an individual’s right to financial support to ensure a dignified standard of living. The objective of maintenance laws is to prevent financial hardship and ensure that dependents are not left without means of sustenance. Maintenance rights have been recognized by various Laws in India under distinct provisions:

1. Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) provides maintenance rights to wife, children and parents.
2. Section 24 and 25 of Hindu Marriage Act provides maintenance rights to both the spouse, irrespective of gender.
3. Section 20 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act provides maintenance for the aggrieved woman and her children.
4. Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act provides maintenance rights to a wife.

Among these provisions, the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 extends maintenance rights to both the husband and wives. While the term “Husband” and “Wife” are taken only in context of a valid marriage, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 12.02.2025 titled as “SUKHDEV SINGH Vs SUKHBIR KAUR” addressed the issue of entitlement of spouses to alimony and maintenance in void marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The central issue for consideration was:“Whether a spouse of a marriage declared as void by a competent court entitled to claim permanent alimony and maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955”.

Before delving into the facts of the abovementioned case, lets understand what is a void marriage. Section 11 of the HMA provides for the circumstances where a marriage can be declared as void. Marriages declared void under Section 11 of the HMA are void ab initio, meaning that it is considered non existent in the eyes of Law. The following category of marriages are declared void under Hindu Marriage Act:

1. If one or both the parties to the marriage have a spouse living at the time of marriage i.e. the parties have committed bigamy;
2. The parties to a marriage are within a degree of prohibited relationship as defined u/s 3 (g) of HMA
3. The parties are sapindas of each other as defined u/s 3 (f) of HMA

Coming back to the judgment of the Apex Court, given conflicting judicial opinions on whether maintenance could be granted in void marriages, the Supreme Court referred the matter to the given bench of three judges for authoritative determination on the issue whether alimony can be granted to spouses whose marriage has been declared void?  

The Court interpreted Section 25 which provides for Permanent Alimony and maintenance. Section 25 confers power on the Court to grant permanent alimony “at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto”. The Courts are granted with the discretionary power to grant alimony while passing a decree in any proceeding if it appears to the Court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no sufficient income to support his/her necessary expenses.

The court further went on to explain the term “Decree” by emphasizing that the Act does not make any distinction between a Decree of divorce and decree of nullity of marriage. Therefore, even if a marriage is declared void, the dependent spouse is entitled to seek permanent alimony. This interpretation aims to prevent financial hardship for dependent spouse in a void marriage.

A notable contention raised by the husband in the said judgment which draws attention was whether a wife who concealed her existing marriage at the time of her second marriage entitled to alimony and maintenance. Addressing this issue, the Court answered as follows:

“A grant of a decree under Section 25 of the 1955 Act is discretionary. If the conduct of the spouse who applies for maintenance is such that the said spouse is not entitled to discretionary relief, the Court can always turn down the prayer for the grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the 1955 Act. Equitable considerations do apply when the Court considers the prayer for maintenance under Section 25. The reason is that Section 25 lays down that while considering the prayer for granting relief under Section 25, the conduct of the parties must be considered.”

COURT’S FINDINGS:

1. A spouse whose marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of the HMA is entitled to seek permanent alimony or maintenance from the other spouse.
2. Even if the Court comes to a prima facie conclusion that the marriage between the parties is void, the Court is not precluded from granting interim maintenance to the spouse claiming the same.
3. Courts retains the discretion to consider the conduct of the parties before granting maintenance.

CONCLUSION

In my opinion the Apex Court by using a progressive approach has emphasized on protecting financially vulnerable spouses irrespective of the validity of the marriage. The Apex Court by adopting a balanced approach has upheld right of the spouse for maintenance ensuring that no dependent spouse is left without financial recourse.