The legal consequences of a marriage void under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are ordinarily determined by the absence of valid marital status. A woman whose marriage is void under Section 11 does not acquire the status of a legally wedded wife and, upon the man’s death, cannot ordinarily claim the status of a widow or qualify as a Class I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Although this position accords with the statutory scheme, it has serious economic implications where the woman entered the relationship in good faith, contributed to the household, bore children and became substantially dependent on the relationship. Hindu family law has, however, gradually recognised that the invalidity of a marriage does not necessarily extinguish every legal consequence arising from the relationship. Judicial developments concerning maintenance, permanent alimony, relationships in the nature of marriage and protection against economic deprivation reveal an increasing distinction between formal marital status and substantive economic protection. Against this background, the paper examines whether complete exclusion of a woman in a void marriage from the deceased man’s estate remains justified in all circumstances. The paper argues that a narrowly defined protective entitlement may be considered for women who entered such relationships in good faith and suffered substantial economic dependence, without validating the void marriage or conferring the status of widow. Grounded in justice, equity and good conscience, and informed by constitutional principles of equality, non-arbitrariness and dignity, such protection must preserve the statutory priority of the legally recognised widow and avoid undermining the prohibition against bigamy. The paper therefore proposes a limited distinction between marital status and economic protection to prevent disproportionate economic deprivation in appropriate cases.