- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1823 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1823 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1823 OF 2008 Prabhu Mahadeo Navgire ...Petitioner vs. Salubai Prabhu Navgire ...Respondent Mr.Surel S. Shah for the petitioner Mr.J.P.Yagnik A.P.P. for State CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : SEPTEMBER 22,2008 : SEPTEMBER 22,2008 : SEPTEMBER 22,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner. The first Respondent who claims to be a lawfully wedded wife of the Petitioner filed an application for maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code). The said application was contested by the Petitioner. His case was that 22 years back he had married to one Lata. In the reply, the Petitioner did not dispute that at least for some time, the first Respondent was staying with him. However, the basic contention is that as the Petitioner was lawfully married to one Lata, the first respondent could not be his legally wedded wife. The contention is raised that the first Respondent has not established her marriage with the Petitioner. The learned Magistrate upheld the contention raised by the first Respondent and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- p.m. The said order has been confirmed in the revision. - 2 - 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that unless the first Respondent had established that she had lawfully married to the petitioner, the first Respondent was not entitled to claim the maintenance. His submission is that as the Petitioner had long back married to said Lata, his alleged marriage with the first Respondent could not be lawful. 3. I have considered the submissions. The proceedings under section 125 of the said Code are summary proceedings. A wife who applies for maintenance under the said provision is not required to prove the solemnisation of marriage by leading the evidence of performance of religious rites. She has to prima facie satisfy the learned Magistrate of existence of marriage. In a given case, the fact that a man and a woman were residing together for sufficiently long time as a husband and wife may be sufficient to infer marriage for the purpose of proceeding under section 125 of the said Code. It is well settled that a decision under section 125 of the said Code does not conclusively decide the issue of status and notwithstanding the order passed under section 125 of the said Code, the parties can approach the Civil Court for seeking declaration of the status. After obtaining a decree of declaration from the Civil Court, a remedy of applying under sub section (2) of Section 127 is always available. - 3 - 4. In the present case, the courts below have concurrently found that the first Respondent has established her marriage with the Petitioner. The maintenance of only Rs.500/- p.m. has been granted. Therefore, no case is made out for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Petition is rejected. 5. It is made clear that notwithstanding the confirmation of the impugned order, it will be open for the Petitioner to file a declaratory suit and seek appropriate declaration as regards the status. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE