Love Jihad Accused Ordered To Pay ₹20k Monthly To Wife And Daughter

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside a family court order denying maintenance to a woman who alleged that a man married her after concealing his religious identity, holding that refusing support in such circumstances would amount to further victimisation of the woman.

In a significant order, Justice Gajendra Singh allowed a criminal revision petition filed by a woman and her minor daughter against a family court ruling that had rejected the woman's maintenance claim while awarding only Rs 2,000 per month to the child.

The woman alleged that the respondent married her in February 2020 while representing himself as a Hindu and that she later discovered through his Aadhaar card that his name was Gabbar alias Mustafa and that he belonged to the Bohra community.

She further alleged that she was subjected to threats, cruelty, pressure to adopt another religion, and physical assault after the disclosure.

The petitioner s counsel Rajesh Joshi said that an FIR was registered at Dwarkapuri police station in Indore under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Madhya Pradesh Dharmik Swatantrya Adhiniyam, 2021.

The petitioner also alleged subsequent attempts to abduct and intimidate her.

The family court had earlier held that the woman could not be treated as the legally wedded wife of the respondent and therefore rejected her maintenance claim, though it recognised the child as the respondent's daughter and awarded her Rs 2,000 per month.

However, the High Court observed that where marriage ceremonies had been performed after the respondent allegedly concealed his identity and a child was born from the relationship, the family court erred in dismissing the woman's claim solely on the ground that the marriage was not legally valid. The court said such an approach resulted in "further victimisation" of the petitioner.

Taking into account the cost of living in Indore, the High Court awarded maintenance of Rs 10,000 per month to the woman from the date of filing of the application and enhanced the maintenance payable to the daughter from Rs 2,000 to Rs 10,000 per month, also effective from the date of the original application.

The court noted that the respondent remained absent despite being served notice during the proceedings. With these observations, the revision petition was allowed and disposed of.

Trial court committed an illegality

When the marriage rituals were performed with the petitioner concealing the religious identity and a child was born out of the said relationship, the trial court committed an illegality in discarding the claim of the petitioner merely on the ground that the relationship could not be treated as a legally valid marriage.

The finding that petitioner cannot be treated as the legally wedded wife of the respondent is unsustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Such an approach results in further victimisation of petitioner who had already suffered at the hands of the respondent and thereafter was denied maintenance by the Trial Court, Justice Gajendra Singh noted.