• Today: October 31, 2025

Badshah v. Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr

31 October, 2025
151
Badshah v. Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr (2014) 1 SCC 188 — Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC | The Law Easy

Badshah v. Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr

Supreme Court of India — (2014) 1 SCC 188

Court: Supreme Court India Published: 31 Oct 2025 Author: Gulzar Hashmi Citation: (2014) 1 SCC 188 Reading: ~6 min Section 125 CrPC
Hero image for Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse — Supreme Court maintenance case

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court used a welfare-first view of Section 125 CrPC. Even if a marriage is technically invalid, a woman may be treated as a “wife” for maintenance to stop unfairness. The child, once paternity is proved, must be supported by the father. The Court refused to let legal loopholes defeat social justice.

```

Issues

  • Can a woman from an invalid marriage claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC?
  • Is the father bound to maintain the child when paternity is proved?

Rules

  • Section 125 CrPC is a quick relief against destitution. It is beneficial and must be read broadly.
  • Courts may treat a woman as a wife for maintenance if strict proof of a valid marriage would cause injustice.
  • A father cannot avoid maintenance for a child once paternity is established.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline illustration of facts in Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse
Prior marriage & divorce: Urmila earlier married Popat Fapale and later divorced.
Marriage with petitioner: At Devgad Temple (Hivargav-Pavsa) as per Hindu rites; she cohabited with the petitioner.
Second woman appears: A woman named Shobha came and claimed to be the petitioner’s wife.
Ill-treatment: While pregnant, Urmila faced mental and physical cruelty; petitioner suspected paternity and pressed for abortion.
Separation: Abuse became intolerable; Urmila returned to her parents and gave birth to daughter Shivanjali.
Maintenance claim: Urmila and child sought maintenance. Petitioner denied marriage, cohabitation, and paternity.
Magistrate & High Court: Maintenance awarded—₹1000/month to Urmila and ₹500/month to the child; affirmed by Bombay High Court.
Supreme Court: Leave sought by petitioner; Court examined the welfare purpose of Section 125.

Arguments

Appellant (Husband)

  • No valid marriage with Urmila; denial of cohabitation.
  • Denied paternity of the child.
  • Claimed false allegations and blackmail.

Respondents (Wife & Child)

  • Marriage performed as per rites; lived as husband and wife.
  • Child conceived during cohabitation; paternity attributable to petitioner.
  • Sought maintenance under Section 125 CrPC to prevent destitution.

Judgment

Judgment illustration for Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse

The Supreme Court dismissed the husband’s petition. It held that the child must be maintained by the father. For the woman, the Court read Section 125 purposively and treated her as a wife for maintenance so that injustice is not done.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 125 CrPC is a social justice remedy. Its terms are to be interpreted to prevent hardship. Where a husband benefits from a technical invalidity of marriage to deny support, courts can treat the woman as a wife for maintenance.

Key idea: Purpose over technicality—no one should suffer destitution due to legal loopholes.

Why It Matters

  • Protects women who are misled into marriages and later abandoned.
  • Strengthens child rights by confirming unconditional paternal duty.
  • Sets a clear message: welfare aims of Section 125 outrank rigid formalism.

Key Takeaways

  • “Wife” in Section 125 can be read broadly to stop injustice.
  • Child’s maintenance follows from proved paternity—no escape.
  • Courts prefer purposive interpretation in welfare statutes.
  • Bad faith by a spouse cannot defeat maintenance claims.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “BAD-SHAH = Bad faith? Support her.”

  1. Benefit of doubt to the vulnerable (woman & child).
  2. Aim is welfare, not ritual validity.
  3. Duty of father stands firm.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Is maintenance under Section 125 CrPC available to a woman from an invalid marriage, and must the father maintain the child?

Rule

Section 125 is a welfare tool. Courts may treat the woman as a wife to prevent injustice; paternity fixes maintenance duty for the child.

Application

Given cohabitation, pregnancy, and conduct, denying support would reward wrongdoing. The mother qualifies for maintenance; the child must be supported.

Conclusion

Petition dismissed. Maintenance to mother (as wife for Section 125) and to child affirmed.

Glossary

Section 125 CrPC
Provision for quick maintenance to prevent vagrancy and destitution.
Purposive Interpretation
Reading a law to achieve its aim, not just its literal words.
Invalid Marriage
A marriage that fails legal requirements (e.g., due to subsisting earlier marriage).

FAQs

No. Courts can treat the woman as a wife to avoid injustice, especially when the husband acted in bad faith.

Paternity. Once proved, the father must maintain the child—marital validity is irrelevant.

No. It gave maintenance as a welfare measure without declaring the marriage valid.

Badshah v. Urmila, (2014) 1 SCC 188 — purposive reading of Section 125; woman treated as wife; child’s maintenance mandatory.
Reviewed by The Law Easy Maintenance Section 125 CrPC Family Law
```

Comment

Nothing for now