Can a Spouse Claim Alimony and Maintenance If Their Marriage Is Declared Void Under Hindu Marriage Act? Supreme Court Answers

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has ruled that a spouse whose marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) is still entitled to claim permanent alimony and maintenance under Section 25 of the Act. The Court further clarified that interim maintenance under Section 24 can also be granted even when the marriage is void or voidable, subject to the court's discretion and the conduct of the parties involved.

This ruling resolves a long-standing conflict in judicial interpretation regarding whether a spouse can claim maintenance under Section 25 of the HMA when a marriage has been declared null and void. The decision was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Augustine George Masih, in response to a reference made by a two-judge bench led by Justice Vikram Nath due to conflicting Supreme Court precedents on the subject.

Key Legal Provisions and Supreme Court's Interpretation

1. Permanent Alimony Under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act

The Court held that Section 25 of the HMA, which provides for permanent alimony and maintenance, is applicable even when a marriage is declared void. The key question raised before the Court was whether the term “any decree” under Section 25(1) of HMA includes decrees of nullity under Section 11.

The Husband/Appellant contended that a void marriage is legally non-existent, and therefore, a spouse should not be entitled to claim benefits under Section 25. He argued that the provision should only apply to cases where the marriage was legally valid before the grant of a divorce decree.

Rejecting this argument, the Supreme Court held that the term “any decree” in Section 25(1) of HMA includes a decree of nullity, and a spouse from a void marriage is not automatically disqualified from seeking permanent alimony and maintenance. The Court emphasized that the legislature made no distinction between a decree of divorce and a decree of nullity while enacting Section 25. Hence, a decree declaring a marriage void under Section 11 of the HMA is still considered a "decree" for the purpose of Section 25, allowing a claim for maintenance.

Relevant Excerpt from the Judgment:"While enacting Section 25(1), the legislature has made no distinction between a decree of divorce and a decree declaring marriage as a nullity. Therefore, on a plain reading of Section 25(1), it will not be possible to exclude a decree of nullity under Section 11 from the purview of Section 25(1) of the 1955 Act," the Court observed.

Thus, the grant of permanent alimony and maintenance in cases of void marriages remains within the discretion of the Court, and each case will be determined based on its individual facts and the conduct of the parties.

2. Interim Maintenance Under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act

The Supreme Court also addressed the issue of interim maintenance (maintenance pendente lite) under Section 24 of HMA, clarifying that even if a court prima facie finds that the marriage is void or voidable, it is still empowered to grant interim maintenance pending the final determination of the case.

The Court noted that interim maintenance under Section 24 is always discretionary, and while deciding such claims, the conduct of the party seeking relief will be taken into consideration.

Relevant Excerpt from the Judgment:"Even if a court comes to a prima facie conclusion that the marriage between the parties is void or voidable, pending the final disposal of the proceeding under the 1955 Act, the court is not precluded from granting maintenance pendente lite provided the conditions mentioned in Section 24 are satisfied."

Thus, a spouse from a void marriage is not barred from seeking interim maintenance during the pendency of proceedings, and courts have the discretion to award such relief after considering the circumstances of the case.

Background and Legal Context

Under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a marriage is considered void ab initio (invalid from the outset) if:

1. Either spouse was already married at the time of the marriage (bigamy).

2. The spouses fall within the prohibited degrees of relationship under Section 5 of the Act.

3. The spouses are sapinda (closely related by blood) under Section 5 of HMA.

Prior to this ruling, conflicting Supreme Court judgments had created ambiguity regarding whether a spouse from a void marriage could claim alimony or maintenance under Section 25 of HMA. Some judgments held that no relief can be granted under Section 25 since a void marriage has no legal recognition. However, other judgments recognized the need to provide financial protection to spouses (especially women) who may be left destitute after a void marriage.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in this case has now settled the legal uncertainty by affirming that permanent alimony and maintenance under Section 25, as well as interim maintenance under Section 24, can be granted even when a marriage is declared void.

Implications of the Judgment

1. Recognition of Financial Rights of Spouses in Void Marriages

   • The ruling ensures that spouses from void marriages are not left financially vulnerable. Even though the marriage is legally non-existent, a spouse may still be entitled to financial support.

     
     

2. Judicial Discretion in Maintenance Awards

   • The grant of permanent alimony and interim maintenance remains discretionary and will depend on the facts of each case, including the conduct of the parties.

     
     

3. Impact on Women’s Rights and Social Justice

   • The ruling particularly benefits women trapped in void marriages, providing them with a legal avenue for financial support.

     
     

4. Clarification on the Scope of Section 25 of HMA

   • By interpreting “any decree” under Section 25 to include decrees of nullity, the Supreme Court has expanded the scope of maintenance claims under the HMA.

     
     

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2025 LiveLaw (SC) 195) is a significant judgment that clarifies the legal position on maintenance in cases of void marriages. By holding that permanent alimony and interim maintenance can be granted even when a marriage is declared void, the Court has ensured financial protection and legal recognition for spouses in such circumstances.

This decision provides much-needed clarity and consistency in matrimonial law, reinforcing the principles of fairness, equity, and social justice. While the ruling affirms the discretionary nature of maintenance awards, it underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring financial security and dignity for individuals affected by void marriages.

With this judgment, the Supreme Court has provided a progressive and inclusive interpretation of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, ensuring that no spouse is unfairly denied financial relief merely because the marriage was declared void.