Smt. Shiramabai vs The Captain, Record Officer for O.I.C. Records
Background
A soldier, the late Subedar Bhave, married his second wife Anusuya after his first wife died, but while still married to Anusuya, he also went through a marriage ceremony with the appellant, Shiramabai, in 1981. Bhave and Anusuya later obtained a mutual-consent divorce in 1990, after which Bhave lived with Shiramabai as husband and wife until his death in 2001, and even had the Army officially update his service records to reflect Shiramabai as his wife. When Shiramabai sought family pension after his death, the authorities refused, arguing her marriage was void because it occurred while Bhave was still married to Anusuya.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court applied the well-established legal presumption that when a man and woman live together continuously as husband and wife for a long period, courts presume they were validly married unless there is strong evidence to the contrary. Here, even discounting the years before the 1990 divorce, Bhave and Shiramabai had cohabited openly as spouses for eleven more years until his death, had two children together, and the Army itself had accepted and recorded the relationship. Since Bhave's first co-wife Anusuya never claimed any pension, the Court held the presumption of valid marriage applied and reversed the High Court's decision, restoring the trial court's decree that entitled Shiramabai to family pension and her children to benefits until they turned 25.
Lesson Learnt
Long-term, open cohabitation as husband and wife can create a legal presumption of a valid marriage strong enough to secure pension and inheritance rights, even where the marriage's origins were technically irregular, unless someone comes forward with clear evidence to rebut that presumption.