N. Usha Rani vs Moodudula Srinivas 2025 INSC 129- S 125 CrPC - Second Marriage

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 125 - The right to maintenance u/s. 125 CrPC is not a benefit received by a wife but rather a legal and moral duty owed by the husband - Referred to Mohd. Abdul Samad vs. State of Telangana - Social welfare provisions must be subjected to an expansive and beneficial construction- In this case, the issue raised was: Whether a woman is entitled to claim maintenance u/s. 125 CrPC from her second husband while her first marriage is allegedly legally subsisting? Distinguished judgments in Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav vs. Anantrao Shivram Adhav and Another (1988) 1 SCC 530 and Bakulabai and Another vs. Gangaram and Another (1988) 1 SCC 537 which denied maintenance in cases of subsisting marriages- Plea of separation from the first marriage was not made in those cases and hence, they are factually distinguishable- when the social justice objective of maintenance u/s. 125CrPC is considered against the particular facts and circumstances of this case, we cannot, in good conscience, deny maintenance to Appellant - The Court also noted: Respondent knowingly entered into a marriage with Appellant not once, but twice. While MoU of Separation is not a legal decree of divorce, it also emerges from this document and other evidence that the parties have dissolved their ties, they have been living separately and Appellant is not deriving maintenance from her first husband. Therefore, barring the absence of a legal decree, Appellant is de facto separated from her first husband and is not deriving any rights and entitlements as a consequence of that marriage.