Section 125 CrPC — Live-In Partner · 29 July 2026
Manju Sonkar v. State of U.P.: Woman Who Did Not Plead or Prove a Live-In Relationship Cannot Claim Section 125 CrPC Maintenance on That Basis
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad · 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 495; Criminal Revision No. 3086 of 2025
Download the full judgment (PDF)
Enter your name and WhatsApp number to get the download link. We'll also let you know on WhatsApp if we can help with this case — filing, tracking, or anything else — no obligation either way.
We use this only to send the link and to follow up about this case. See our privacy policy.
The revisionist approached the High Court against an order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaushambi. That court had granted maintenance under Section 125 CrPC to her minor son but rejected her own claim, finding she was not the legally wedded wife of the opposite party, who was married to another woman, and a second marriage is not permitted under Hindu law while an earlier one subsists. In the High Court she relied on the Supreme Court's view that a woman who has lived with a man for a considerable period may be entitled to maintenance as if a wife. The man categorically denied any relationship with her.
Justice Lakshmi Kant Shukla held that a woman seeking Section 125 maintenance cannot invoke the protection given to live-in partners where she has neither pleaded such a relationship nor established that a marriage took place, all the more where the man denies any relationship. The Court found the Supreme Court decision relied on distinguishable on its facts, noted that the Family Court's order was reasoned and based on the whole material before it, and dismissed the revision. The order for the son's maintenance was not disturbed.
General information, not legal advice. This is a plain-language summary for awareness only. Every case turns on its own facts, and this judgment does not decide how a court will rule in your matter. For advice on your own case, speak to an independent advocate — MyCaseFile is not a law firm and does not interpret judgments for anyone's case.