Revision, petitioner and respondent entered into a registered agreement of marriage. Admittedly revision petitioner has his first wife living. Respondent the alleged second wife, pleading neglect and inability to maintain herself filed petition under section 125, CrPC against the revision petitioner. He pleaded that the alleged second marriage was not a marriage in the eyes of law and in any event it is void on account of the subsistence of his first marriage with another woman. Learned Magistrate held that there was a marriage between the revision petitioner and the respondent by agreement and they have been living together as husband and wife and accordingly awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 15O/- per month. Learned Sessions Judge in revision declined to interfere. Hence this petition under section 482, CrPC. 2. Even assuming that there was a lawful marriage between the parties, that is, lawful but for the subsistence of the first marriage, the marriage would be void in the eyes of law. The parties are Hindus and governed by the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Under clause (i) of section 5 of the Act the necessary condition fora lawful marriage is that neither party should have a spouse living at the time of the marriage. A marriage, in contravention of this condition is null and void. For the purpose of section 125 of the Code a wife most be a lawfully wedded wife. Whether the marriage is lawful or not can be decided only with reference to the personal law applicable to the parties. Under the personal law applicable to the parties, marriage, if any, between these parties is a nullity and the alleged wife cannot have the status of a lawfully wedded wife. She cannot therefore obtain maintenance under section 125 of the Code. See, Smti Yamunabai Amantrao Adhav vs. Anantrao Shivram Adhav & another, AIR 1988 SC 644 . 3. The two Courts below have committed serious error of law in ignoring this aspect of the matter. In this view it is unnessary to consider whether the decision in Boli Narayan Pawye vs. Smti Shiddheswari Morang, 1981 Crl LJ 674 requires reconsideration. 4. For the above reasons, the impugned orders of the Courts below are set aside and the petition under section 125 CrPC is dismissed. 5 The revision petition is allowed.