Cal HC upholds grant of interim maintenance to Hindu woman who married a Muslim

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the grant of interim maintenance by a magistrate court to a Hindu woman who married a man according to the Muslim rites and Customs.

The high court noted that the Supreme Court has held that a Muslim man is liable to pay maintenance to his wife until a competent court declares the marriage void.

Following alleged desertion and domestic violence by the husband, the woman moved a magistrate court in Paschim Bardhaman district and was granted an interim maintenance of Rs 5,000 for herself and Rs 4,000 for her minor son.

A revisional court in February 2024 set aside the grant of interim maintenance on a petition challenging the magistrate's order by the man.

Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) held that the revisional court failed to apply its judicial mind and did not consider the law laid down regarding maintenance.

Only on mere technicalities, it passed an order ''which practically frustrates the object of enacting the provision for social justice, especially to women and children and therefore is liable to be set aside'', the court said.

Setting aside the order of the Additional Session Judge 3rd court, Asansol, Paschim Bardhaman, Justice Chatterjee (Das) on Monday affirmed the order of interim maintenance passed by the magistrate.

The opposite party was directed to pay the amount of interim maintenance in accordance with the direction passed by the magistrate.

Justice Chatterjee (Das) noted that the Supreme Court has observed in one matter that an unlawful marriage would still subsist, and the Muslim man is liable to pay maintenance to his wife until a competent court declares the marriage void.

Taking note of earlier judgments, Justice Chatterjee (Das) said that in another matter, the court held that under Muslim Law, ''there are three types of marriage -- valid, irregular and void. A marriage between a Muslim man and a Hindu lady is only irregular (fasid) and not void (batil).''.

The high court held that, prima facie, the wife could show a marriage registration certificate and the birth certificate of the child and the opposite party could not rebut the same by producing any cogent evidence except for mere denial.

There is no room left to discard the same at the preliminary stage, and therefore, the magistrate rightly passed the order of maintenance, it said.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)