Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha & Another (2010)

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court considered if a woman, who lived for long with a man as his wife (custom or live-in), can claim maintenance when he deserts her. The Court stressed the social aim of Section 125 CrPC—preventing vagrancy—and indicated that a man should not hide behind technicalities after enjoying a marriage-like relationship. The questions were referred to a larger Bench for final clarity.

• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Year: 2010
• Civil Appeal No. 15071

Issues

1. Can the appellant claim maintenance from the respondent despite doubts about a strictly valid marriage?

Rules

• If a man lives with a woman for a long time in a marriage-like relationship, he should be made liable to pay maintenance if he deserts her.
• Section 125 CrPC aims to prevent destitution; substance of relationship matters more than technical form.

Arguments

Judgment (Held)

The Supreme Court favoured a humane approach: the law presumes marriage when the couple live together as spouses and society treats them so. Section 125 CrPC serves a social mission—preventing destitution. The Court referred the larger questions to a bigger Bench, but indicated that a man in a marriage-like relationship should not escape maintenance on mere technicalities.

Ratio Decidendi

• Long cohabitation + public reputation as spouses ⇒ presumption of marriage.
• Section 125 CrPC is remedial and preventive; focus on avoiding destitution.
• Technical defects in proving marriage should not defeat a genuine maintenance claim.

Why It Matters

The case protects women in long, marriage-like relationships. It signals that courts will value real life over rigid form when deciding maintenance and will not permit strategic desertion.

Key Takeaways

• Presumption of marriage arises from long cohabitation and social recognition.
• Section 125 CrPC aims at social justice—prevent destitution first.
• Men cannot enjoy a de facto marriage and dodge support by legal loopholes.
• Larger Bench reference sought to settle the law authoritatively.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: LIVE-IN = L I V E — Long living, Identity as spouses, Visible to society, Entitled to support.

1. Spot marriage-like life (time + public reputation).
2. Link to Section 125: prevent destitution.
3. Apply presumption: don’t let technicalities defeat maintenance.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Whether the appellant can claim maintenance despite possible non-compliance with strict marriage formalities.

Rule

Long cohabitation allows a presumption of marriage; Section 125 CrPC is welfare-oriented and prevents destitution.

Application

The parties lived together as spouses; society viewed them as husband and wife; respondent later deserted and stopped support.

Conclusion

Maintenance should be considered payable; questions referred to a larger Bench for final rule-setting.

Glossary

Section 125 CrPC

Criminal Procedure provision for quick maintenance to prevent destitution.

Presumption of Marriage

Legal inference from long cohabitation and public reputation as spouses.

Customary Marriage

Marriage performed as per local/community customs.

De facto Marriage

Marriage-like relationship without full legal formalities.

FAQs

Related Cases