Wife from Void Marriage:

It is undoubtedly true that the Maintenance Act is a beneficial piece of legislation conferring additional rights on women and children. However, it cannot be interpreted as conferring maintenance rights on a woman whose marriage is void under the Hindu Marriage Act. While legislative enactments may be liberally construed, such liberality cannot overstep the limits of legislative interpretation to include something not provided by the legislation.

If a particular enactment causes hardship or inconvenience, it is the responsibility of the legislature to address it; however, it is not within the court's authority to ignore legislative injunctions. By codifying the personal laws applicable to Hindus, Parliament aimed to establish monogamy among Hindus, leading to the passage of the Hindu Marriage Act to prevent bigamous marriages.

As a result, bigamous marriages are rendered void, and bigamy is classified as a crime punishable under the Act. Therefore, it does not appear to be Parliament's intention that a bigamous relationship, while void, should be recognized for the purposes of maintenance.

A Hindu man has an obligation to maintain his wife, minor sons, unmarried daughters, and aged parents. This obligation is personal, arising from the nature of these relationships, and exists regardless of his possession of property. The Maintenance Act gives statutory form to this obligation.

The right of a Hindu wife to maintenance is an incident of matrimony. Sub-section (1) of Section 18 of the Act substantially reiterates this right, establishing the general rule that a Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of the Act, is entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime.

The rule in this section is subject to exceptions stated in Sub-section (3), which specifies that a wife cannot claim separate residence and maintenance if she is unchaste or ceases to be Hindu due to conversion to another religion. Under Sub-section (2) of Section 18, a wife is entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim for maintenance under the circumstances outlined in Clauses (a) to (g) of the subsection. Under Clause (d), a wife is entitled to separate residence without forfeiting her claim for maintenance if her husband has another wife living.

This claim for maintenance is maintainable under this section regardless of whether the marriage took place before or after the applicant wife's marriage, provided the other wife is alive. This condition applies only to marriages solemnized before the Hindu Marriage Act came into effect, as the Act established monogamy as a legal rule, prohibiting Hindu husbands from remarrying after its commencement. A bigamous marriage contracted after the Act's implementation is null and void, eliminating the possibility of a second wife.

Thus, the term "Hindu wife" in Section 18(1) refers exclusively to a legally wedded Hindu wife, who alone is entitled to claim maintenance from her husband under this section. If her marriage is void ab initio, she is not entitled to claim maintenance under this section. "Hindu wife" in this section denotes only a wife whose marriage is valid under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. A wife whose marriage was solemnized but is void due to the husband's pre-existing marriage at the time of their marriage is not entitled to claim maintenance under this provision.

References:

1. Hari Lal vs. Balvantia