Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC requires strict proof of a prior subsisting marriage to defeat a wife's claim.

Section 125 CrPC is described as a social justice remedy to prevent vagrancy and destitution by providing speedy relief to a deserted wife. Where a husband resists maintenance by alleging an earlier subsisting marriage and characterising the claimant as a kept mistress, strict proof of the prior valid and continuing marriage is required. On the materials discussed, the alleged first marriage was not conclusively established and its subsistence at the time of the claimant's marriage was not proved, so the burden of proof was not discharged and maintenance was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, despite the respondent's plea that an earlier subsisting marriage rendered the marriage void.

Analysis: Section 125 is a measure of social justice intended to prevent vagrancy and destitution and to provide speedy relief to a deserted wife. Where a husband seeks to defeat a maintenance claim by asserting a prior marriage and depicting the claimant as a kept mistress, strict proof of the earlier valid and subsisting marriage is required. The materials relied upon by the respondent did not conclusively establish a legal marriage with the alleged first wife or its subsistence at the time of the appellant's marriage, and the burden of proof was not discharged.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to maintenance, and the order granting maintenance was restored.

---