In Brief
A wife and two children appealed against the High Court's decision to set aside a family court order directing their husband/father to pay maintenance. The issue was whether the wife had adequately proved her marriage to claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The Supreme Court held that proof of marriage in Section 125 proceedings need not be as strict as in formal matrimonial cases, since the provision aims to prevent vagrancy and destitution. Where parties have cohabited as husband and wife, borne children, and lived openly in that relationship, a strong legal presumption of marriage arises. The Court found the evidence—birth certificates, photographs, witness testimony, and payment of maintenance—sufficiently established the valid marriage, and set aside the High Court's judgment that had interfered with the family court's factual findings.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.