Cruelty as an act and ground under the aspects of marriage are different, we need the understand it as there is borderline difference. By this statement Mere arguments and disagreements between couples is not always amounting to cruelty it the decisive moment of realisation by one of the spouses that they have been acting which an unconscious mind which has been led on by the apprehension of fear caused by the other spouse. It is reaching to a stage where a person almost fails to differentiate between a mere fight and someone acting under complete germinated seed of brutality. Cruelty in matrimonial cases can be unfolded in variety of ways. They can be subtle and brutal. A subtle act may somewhat look like being harsh but talking about brutality and cruelty is something that is personal.
Under the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 under section 13 (1) (ia) cruelty has been made as an ground for divorce which can be claimed by both husband and wife. Studying the history of the Hindu Marriage Act the cruelty was never taken as ground for divorce but was only applied in the cases of judicial separation. Here the aggrieved party had to prove that the cruelty is of such a grave nature that it will inevitable for the person to continue to stay in the wedlock. Later it was held by the Supreme Court in the case of Narayan Dastane vs. Sucheta Dastane in 1975. This led to an amendment in the Act where cruelty as a ground for divorce was added into the Act with the inclusion of legal definition to the term cruelty under this Act in 1976. However, the Court also held that the courts should decide the case on grounds of cruelty only based upon the subject matter of the case. After the amendment in this act, there was not much distinction between the grounds of cruelty resulting in judicial separation and grounds of cruelty resulting in divorce except for two words that are added are “persistently or repeatedly”. By this addition, the establishment of cruelty as a ground for divorce was given much more importance than proving it as a ground for judicial separation. This ground was added under Section 10(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 and now “Cruelty” has a self-contained definition.
MAINTENACE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955
Under the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 maintenance is given under section 24. Under section 24 of the HMA it can be claimed during the pendency of the trial and under section 25 of the HMA it is claimed after the decree of divorce has been passed. The maintenance under section 24 of the HMA is a pendelite maintenance. This provision is made for supporting the spouse that who cannot bear the expenses of the court proceedings which came in the way due to the filling of the divorce by one of the parties.
MAINTENANCE UNDER SECTION 125 CRPC
Maintenance under the criminal procedure code is the order to maintain the wife, children and parents who are unable to maintain themselves. It includes both legitimate and illegitimate children, unmarried daughter who is unable maintain herself. But where is the wife is living separately without any sufficient ground, or is living in adultery or if the said couple is mutually separated then the wife is not entitled to any maintenance and is entitled to settlement.
CASE LAW: Mohd ahemad khan vs Shah Bano Begum
Under this case at the age of 65 and with 5 childeren Shah Bano was disowned by her husband and the husband denied maintenance to his wife because there is no such provision under the Muslim Law to provide maintenance to a divorced woman. She claimed maintenance in the court that at the age of 65 she has no source of income and hence needed support. The main issue here that arrived before the court was if the section 125 crpc applies to Muslim women or not. It was held that section 125 Crpc applies to Muslim women as Crpc is a secular law and is free from every religion hence it applies to all Muslim women irrespective of the Muslim divorce laws.
Therefore, from the above judgement we can conclude that section 125 Crpc not only breaks the barriers to any religion which acts as hurdle in many cases but also provides equal protection of law and justice. The provision of maintenance is interrupted by various other aspects but the sole purpose of section 125 Crpc is to provide financial support to the aggrieved party. Hence, it can be rightly said that religion can never over power the need to meet the ends of justice and equality.
TABULAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAINTENANCE UNDER HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955 AND 125 CRPC,1973.
| MAINTENANCE UNDER HMA,1955 | MAINTENANCE UNDER 125,CRPC 1973 |
| It is claimed during the pendency of the trial and the passing of decree | It has no such time bar and can be claimed at any time |
| It can be claimed by both husband and wife | It can be claimed only wife , children and parents |
| It is non secular law | It is a secular law |
