In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court hold that a woman who knowingly contracts a void…

In Khemchand Om Prakash Sharma v. State of Gujarat, (2000) 3 SCC 753 (a principle also affirmed in Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Anantrao Shivram Adhav, (1988) 1 SCC 530 and Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat, (2005) 3 SCC 636), the Supreme Court held that where a man's first wife is alive and the first marriage has not been annulled or dissolved, a woman who contracts a void second marriage with him (absent deception or concealment) does not acquire the status of a legally wedded "wife" and therefore cannot claim maintenance under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). By contrast, in Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse, (2014) 1 SCC 188, the Supreme Court carved out a purposive exception where the husband duped the second wife by concealing his subsisting first marriage, holding that he cannot take advantage of his own wrong to defeat her claim for maintenance. State of Haryana v. Santra concerned medical negligence in a sterilisation operation, while the other cited decisions do not lay down this proposition.