SANDEEP SANGWAN Vs. ALKA RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved against the order dated June 04, 2013 passed by the District Judge, Family Court, Hisar whereby respondent-wife was granted maintenance allowance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity, 'Cr.P.C.') from the date of filing of the petition till December 08, 2011 i.e. on the date, a decree of nullity declaring the marriage of the parties as null and void was passed under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act'), petitioner has preferred the instant criminal revision.

(2.) In response to the notice of motion issued by this Court, respondent appeared through her counsel and resisted the petition.

(3.) While assailing the impugned order dated June 04, 2013, it has been ebulliently argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that while allowing the petition, District Judge, Family Court, Hisar has failed to appreciate the fact that the marriage of the parties was void ab initio as the respondent-wife was married on the date of her alleged marriage with petitioner. Subsequently, vide order dated December 08, 2011, their marriage has already been declared to be null and void, on the basis of a petition preferred under Section 11 of the Act. Since, respondent-wife is not the legally-wedded wife of petitioner, she is not entitled to maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.. Thus, impugned order is not legally sustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside.