This is judgement regarding woman not lawfully married under the expression "wife”. thus wife(Savitaben ) was denied maintenance.
The Supreme Court noted that Section 125 of the CrPC provides for maintenance of an illegitimate child but does not include a woman not lawfully married.
Strict proof about a valid marriage is not the sine qua non for getting maintenance under Section 125 of the Code.
In response, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that law is fairly well settled regarding the definition of the expression 'wife' and there is no scope for giving an extended meaning to include a woman who is not legally married.
But as the position in law stands presently there is no escape from the conclusion that the expression 'wife' as per Section 125 of the Code refers to only legally married wife.
The judgment declared that the scope of Section 125 of the CrPC could not be enlarged to include a woman not lawfully married under the expression "wife". Savitaben was thus denied maintenance.
It observed that this is an inadequacy of the law and operates harshly against a woman who gets into a relationship with a man who suppresses the fact of an earlier marriage. But the court said this lacuna could only be cured by the legislature.
(Now husband conceal first marriage to wife can easily escape from liability? )
