Introduction to Nata Marriage:

This custom allows a woman (wife) in some tribes to live with a different guy after divorcing her husband. It’s known as Nata. There are no formal ceremonies required for this. Only consent from both parties exists. This technique is still common in many Rajasthani tribal clans. The live-in relationship that is prevalent in modern society is remarkably comparable to this tradition. It is still widely believed that the purpose of Nata Pratha was to enable widows and abandoned women to participate in society.

Living together does not necessitate a formal marriage ceremony under this arrangement. A couple can fulfill all of their responsibilities as husband and wife without getting married. The custom states that after a woman’s first husband leaves the marriage and gives his wife to another man in exchange for money, a man must pay money to live in a modern live-in relationship with the lady of his choice. Community members, or middlemen, set this sum of money, known as the “bride price,” and they may get paid a cut for it. The amount can vary based on the recipient’s ability to pay, from a few thousand dollars to several lakhs.

From Ex’s Perspective: A guy must give the woman’s spouse a certain sum of money if he wants to live with her after she is married. Once the woman’s husband is satisfied with the settlement, he releases her, allowing her to live with the other man who covered the cost. It’s known as Nata.

Maintenance is the issue that comes up in Nata situations. Is the lady entitled to support from the man she moved in with after divorcing her lawfully married spouse and starting a new relationship?

Overview of the Purpose and Ambit of Section 125 CrPC:

A person with sufficient means may apply for maintenance or interim maintenance under several legislation if he neglects or refuses to provide for his wife, children, or parents. Each of the several enactments offers a unique cure that is framed with a certain goal in mind. As a social justice measure, maintenance laws have been passed to give dependent spouses and children a financial safety net and keep them from becoming homeless or vagrants.

Nothing in this article shall prohibit the State from making any special provision for women and children, according to Article 15(3) of the Indian Constitution[ii]. Various laws have been passed over time as a result of Article 15 (3), which is strengthened by Article 39 of the Indian Constitution, which envisions the State playing a positive role in creating change towards the empowerment of women.

The goal of maintenance legislation is, according to Justice Krishna Iyer’s ruling in the landmark case of Captain Ramesh Chander Kaushal v. Mrs. Veena Kaushal & Ors, it was held,

“9. This provision is a measure of social justice and specially enacted to protect women and children and falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39. We have no doubt that sections of statutes calling for construction by courts are not petrified print but vibrant words with social functions to fulfil. The brooding presence of the constitutional empathy for the weaker sections like women and children must inform interpretation if it has to have social relevance. So viewed, it is possible to be selective in picking out that interpretation out of two alternatives which advances the cause- the cause of the derelicts.”

The Special Marriage Act of 1954 (“SMA”), Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (“D.V. Act”) are the legislative measures that address maintenance. These laws offer women a statutory remedy, independent of their religious affiliation, in addition to the individual laws that apply to different religious communities.

The Supreme Court was debating how to interpret Section 125 CrPC in the case of Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse. The Court decided:

“13.3. …purposive interpretation needs to be given to the provisions of Section 125 CrPC. While dealing with the application of a destitute wife or hapless children or parents under this provision, the Court is dealing with the marginalised sections of the society. The purpose is to achieve “social justice” which is the constitutional vision, enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The Preamble to the Constitution of India clearly signals that we have chosen the democratic path under the rule of law to achieve the goal of securing for all its citizens, justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. It specifically highlights achieving their social justice. Therefore, it becomes the bounden duty of the courts to advance the cause of the social justice. While giving interpretation to a particular provision, the court is supposed to bridge the gap between the law and society.”

Maintenance in situations involving Nata Vivah:

The primary question in situations of maintenance outside of Nata Vivah is whether a woman who has consummated a Nata marriage is considered a wife for the purposes of Section 125 of the CrPC.

According to the ruling in Roopsi @ Roop Singh v. State of Rajasthan, Hindu marriages may be formally performed in line with the customs and rituals of either partner. This is stated in Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It follows that a marriage that is solemnized in accordance with either party’s customary rites and customs is deemed lawful. A Hindu marriage may be performed in line with either party’s traditions and rites under Subsection (1) of Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Since it is undisputed that a “Nata” marriage is acceptable in the community to which the parties belong, the woman in such a marriage is considered to be legally wedded wife.

According to the ruling in Boli Narayan v. Shiddheswari Morang, Section 125 of the CrPC makes it apparent that protecting spouses, kids, and parents is a social justice measure. It is the cornerstone of the essential responsibilities outlined in Article 51A and is covered by Articles 15(3) and 39 of the Constitution. The Preamble to the Constitution, which guarantees social fairness for all, served as the legislative model for this legislation. To allow the provision to fulfill its social purpose as the driving reason behind its enactment, the code words printed must be explained. An interpretation with social relevance is required due to the constitution’s compassion for the disadvantaged elements of society. The interpretation of a word that advances the cause of the derelicts should be accepted when there are legitimate alternative interpretations that may be given to it. Maintenance is due to both divorcees and wives. The entitlement is attainable both during the period when the marriage is intact and after a divorce breaks the marriage bond. Therefore, the presence of a marriage union does not preclude such entitlement. Subject to the restrictions outlined in Section 125, maintenance is equally due to both wives and ex-wives. In order to understand the question, one must consider why the Legislature used the term “wife” rather than “legally married wife” or “married wife.”

Notwithstanding the lack of a formal marriage, a woman who enters a man’s life, devotes herself to him, adopts his family and the man uses her as such, acknowledging her as his wife, must be considered a wife. A woman can be considered to be under the jurisdiction of Section 125 only if she is accepted as a wife, her status is declared, either directly or indirectly, and she accepts her status. The perspective fulfills “the social purpose” for which the Section was passed. If it were rejected, a woman who lived as a wife and gave her life for her husband but was not legally married would not be covered by this provision.

In Saudamini Dei v. Bhagirathi, it was noted that, unlike in civil proceedings where the legality of marriage is a primary issue, it is not necessary to insist on the strict proof of all the formalities of a particular form of legal marriage in order to determine whether a relationship of husband and wife exists for the purposes of Section 125 CrPC.

By requiring the man to fulfill his moral duty, Section 125 of Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 offers a quick and simple solution for paying maintenance to parents, children, and neglected spouses. It is not required to get into legal nuances in a summary proceeding like this one. The case’s facts and circumstances demonstrated that the man and the woman treated the woman as his wife and that they cohabited as husband and wife, receiving respect from the community as such. His clear proclamation was contained in the Panchayati Patra. Therefore, it may be assumed that a marriage occurred for the purposes of Section 125’s limited proposal.

Maintainance claims do not require strict proof of marriage:

In the case of Chanmuniya v. Virender Kumar Singh Kushwaha, it was decided that the term “wife” should be used broadly and expansively to include situations in which a man and a woman have lived together as husband and wife for a respectable amount of time; To fully realize the genuine spirit and meaning of the advantageous provision of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, stringent verification of marriage should not be a prerequisite for receiving support.

The Honorable Apex Court decided in Dwarika Prasad Satpathy v. Bidyut Prava Dixit that:

“Unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, such strict standard proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy.”

Relationship in the Nature of Marriage:

From the debate above, it is clear that rites and ceremonies in the traditional sense are not necessary for Nata Vivah. Furthermore, decisions made by higher courts state that Section 125 CrPC does not strictly require proof of marriage in order to be eligible for maintenance. Thus, it may be said that Nata Marriages and modern live-in relationships are similar in several ways. However, it should be mentioned that merely residing in a live-in situation does not entitle one to maintenance. The arrangement in which a man and a woman live must be demonstrated to be equivalent to a relationship in the sense of marriage.

Referring to the Domestic Violence Act, the Hon’ble Court in D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal observed that the description of “domestic relationship” in Section 2(f) of the Act encompasses both a marriage-like connection and a relationship that is not a marriage.

Since the Act does not define “relationship in the nature of marriage,” the bench clarified what it means. According to the bench, not all relationships that are live-in will qualify as marriages; rather, only those that meet the following conditions will be considered marriages under common law:

• The pair needs to present themselves to the public as being similar to married couples.
• To get married, they must be of legal age.
• In order to be eligible for a legal marriage, they must meet additional requirements, such as being single.
• For a considerable amount of time, they had to have lived together freely and presented themselves to the public as husband and wife.

Furthermore, it was maintained that a one-night stand or only spending the weekends together would not qualify as a domestic partnership. It wouldn’t be a marriage-like relationship if a man has a keep that he supports financially and primarily uses for sex or as a servant.

Entering Nata Vivah without getting divorce amounts to Adultery:

In the case of Bhanwari v. Bhanwari, it was decided that a husband would be guilty of adultery if he married a lady through a Nata Vivah without divorcing his previous wife.

In the case of Vishnu Prasad v. Smt. Durga Bai, it was said that the Brahmin community did not follow the custom of nata vivah. It was said, with reference to the Brahmin group, that there was no such thing as a nata vivah custom there. Therefore, for a Brahmin Man to participate into Nata Vivah without first divorcing his first wife is tantamount to adultery.

In conclusion:

The explanation above leads to the conclusion that the woman who went into a nata marriage must prove the following in order to be eligible for maintenance:

• that their group observes Nata Vivah customs (Mandatory to Prove)
• In either husband-wife community, the necessary rites and ceremonies for the solemnization of Nata Vivah were observed. Every community has a different set of these fundamental rituals and ceremonies. (This needs to be proven, or the next one) or
• the woman needs to demonstrate that she has been living in a situation that qualifies as a marriage-like relationship.