The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a person in a live-in relationship, who has also accused the partner of rape, cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC as if in a husband-wife relationship. Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul upheld an order that denied interim maintenance to a woman who had been granted such relief at the trial stage.
Facts
The woman and the respondent lived together for about ten years and had a child together. She asserted that he had promised marriage.
She petitioned for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, claiming they were cohabiting like spouses.
The respondent was subsequently convicted under Section 376 IPC (rape) based on her complaint.
Court’s Reasoning
Because the respondent was found guilty of rape under Section 376, the court held that their relationship could not be equated to a lawful marital union for purposes of claiming maintenance under Section 125.
The High Court emphasized that the legal duty to pay maintenance under Section 125 arises from a spousal or filiation relationship recognized by law, which doesn’t coexist with a criminal conviction of sexual offence in that context.
It noted that the trial court erred in granting maintenance when the parties’ status could not legally be that of husband and wife.
However, the maintenance rights awarded in respect of the minor child were left undisturbed.
