Introduction
The case of Rohtash Singh vs Ramendri (Smt.) & Ors. [(2000) 3 SCC 180] is a significant Supreme Court judgment on maintenance rights under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), particularly addressing the issue of whether a divorced wife is entitled to maintenance after divorce, especially if she lives in adultery. The decision clarified crucial legal principles regarding the scope of maintenance for divorced wives under Indian law.
Background of the Case
In this case, Ramendri, the respondent (wife), filed a petition under Section 125 CrPC seeking maintenance from her husband Rohtash Singh on the ground that he had neglected and refused to maintain her. During the course of proceedings, it was revealed that the husband had obtained an ex parte divorce decree against the wife on grounds of desertion.
Despite the divorce, the Magistrate awarded maintenance to the wife under Section 125 CrPC. Aggrieved, Rohtash Singh challenged the order, contending that after divorce, the wife was no longer entitled to maintenance.
The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court for final adjudication.
Supreme Court Observations
The Supreme Court examined two primary issues:
- Whether a divorced wife can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC?
- Whether allegations of the wife living in adultery disentitle her from maintenance?
The Court made the following key observations:
- Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance:
The Court reaffirmed that a divorced wife falls within the ambit of ‘wife’ as defined in the Explanation (b) to Section 125(1). Even after divorce, a woman can claim maintenance if she is unable to maintain herself. - Adultery as a Disqualification:
The Court clarified that Section 125(4) CrPC disentitles a wife from maintenance if she is living in adultery, refuses to live with her husband without sufficient reason, or if both are living separately by mutual consent. - Burden of Proof:
The Court emphasized that the burden of proving adultery lies on the husband, and it should be established convincingly. Mere allegations or suspicion are not enough. - Effect of Divorce on Maintenance Claim:
It was held that the divorce obtained by Rohtash Singh did not disentitle the respondent (wife) from claiming maintenance. The provision of Section 125 CrPC is a measure of social justice, and divorced wives unable to maintain themselves are entitled to seek maintenance. - Adjudication on Adultery Not Proved:
In this case, Rohtash Singh could not establish that the wife was living in adultery. Therefore, the wife’s entitlement to maintenance remained intact.
Legal Principles Laid Down
- A divorced wife can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC if she is unable to maintain herself.
- Allegations of adultery, if proved, can disentitle a wife from claiming maintenance.
- The burden of proof for adultery lies on the husband.
- Divorce by itself is not a bar to claiming maintenance.
Conclusion
Rohtash Singh vs Ramendri remains a landmark judgment clarifying that maintenance rights under Section 125 CrPC are available to divorced wives unless disqualified under the exceptions mentioned in Section 125(4). It reinforces that allegations like adultery must be backed with solid proof and mere suspicion won’t suffice.
This judgment is often cited in maintenance disputes where divorced wives claim sustenance and husbands resist on grounds of adultery or divorce.
Citation
For a detailed understanding, you can refer to the full judgment here: Rohtash Singh vs Ramendri (Smt.) & Ors.
Important: Kindly Refer New Corresponding Sections of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, (BNS); Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, (BNSS); & Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023, (BSA) for IPC; CrPC & IEA used in the article.
Disclaimer: This information is intended for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified lawyer for personalized advice specific to your situation.
Advocate J.S. Rohilla (Civil & Criminal Lawyer in Indore)
Contact: 88271 22304