38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, October 23, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Can second spouse or their family be sued for bigamy under law? Karnataka HC explains [Read Order]

By Rintu Mariam Biju      29 March, 2024 08:08 PM      0 Comments
Can second spouse or their family be sued for bigamy under law Karnataka HC explains

BENGALURU: When can a person be prosecuted for bigamy as per law? In a recent judgement, the Karnataka High Court has clarified this position. 
Justice Suraj Govindaraj stated that it is only the husband or wife who marries for the second time during the subsistence of an earlier marriage and the life time of the earlier spouse, can be prosecuted under Section 494 (Marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife) of the Indian Penal Code.

In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that in terms of Section 494 of IPC as is clear from the mere reading of the said provision, it is only the husband and wife who marries for the second time during the subsistence of an earlier marriage and the life time of the earlier spouse who can be prosecuted and not the petitioners herein.

As per the facts of this case, the respondent/complainant who was the first wife, filed a private complaint against her husband, his second wife along with her family members before the JMFC in Chitradurga. 

The complainant was said to have been the first wife, and it was said that during the time that she was married to the Respondent, he had married another lady and therefore, committed an offence. The accused numbers 3 to 6 were brought into the case because they were present at the wedding of the complainant and the accused no. 1, even though they knew that the complainant and her husband were still married. So, the petitioners, who were the second wifes family members, went to court seeking relief. 

Going through the relevant provision, the Court noted that in terms of Section 494 of IPC it is only the person who marries during the subsistence and the life time of the earlier spouse and the earlier marriage could be prosecuted and punished for the offence.

The said provision does not even contemplate the person to whom the husband or wife has married to be prosecuted under Section 494 of IPC. Let alone the father, mother and sister who had participated in or attended the wedding. 

The only allegation made in the complaint at is that accused Nos.3 to 6 have knowledge of the marriage of accused Nos.1 and 2 is illegal and despite which they have participated, the court recorded. 

There is no averment made therein that they were aware of the subsisting marriage between the complainant and accused No.1 or further, there is no allegation made regards the intention on part of accused Nos.3 to 6 having involved themselves in an offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC or felicitated or abated the said offence, 

the bench observed before allowing the plea. 

 

[Read Order]



Share this article:

About:

Rintu Mariam Biju graduated from the National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi after comp...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Karnataka High Court: Cabinet Rank Status Not Equivalent to Ministerial Position [Read Order] Karnataka High Court: Cabinet Rank Status Not Equivalent to Ministerial Position [Read Order]

Karnataka High Court clarifies that Cabinet rank status does not equate to ministerial position, dismissing a PIL challenging political appointments to Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.

Karnataka High Court Grants Protection to Journalist Sudhir Chaudhary Amid Fake News Controversy Karnataka High Court Grants Protection to Journalist Sudhir Chaudhary Amid Fake News Controversy

Karnataka High Court protects journalist Sudhir Chaudhary and Aaj Tak from coercive action over alleged 'fake news' about Karnataka government's minority scheme. Get the latest updates on this legal battle.

Ganeshotsav at Idgah Maidan: High Court Rejects Anjuman-E-Islam's Plea Against Ganesh Idol Installation Ganeshotsav at Idgah Maidan: High Court Rejects Anjuman-E-Islam's Plea Against Ganesh Idol Installation

Karnataka High Court rejects Anjuman-E-Islam's plea against Ganesh idol installation at Idgah Maidan in Hubballi. Get the latest updates on the legal battle and permissions for Ganesha festivities.

Woman living in adultery cannot claim maintenance: Karnataka High Court [Read Order] Woman living in adultery cannot claim maintenance: Karnataka High Court [Read Order]

Karnataka High Court rules that a woman engaged in adultery cannot claim maintenance, stating her dishonesty as a key factor.

TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

father-of-deceased-pilot-in-ahmedabad-crash-moves-sc-for-court-monitored-probe
Trending Judiciary
Father of deceased pilot in Ahmedabad crash moves SC for court monitored probe

91-year-old father of pilot killed in Ahmedabad Air India crash moves SC seeking court-monitored probe into alleged biased and flawed investigation.

17 October, 2025 10:54 AM
child-cant-consent-to-sex-life-imprisonment-upheld-for-sexual-assault-on-minor-girl-madras-hc
Trending Judiciary
Child Can’t Consent to Sex — Life Imprisonment Upheld for Sexual Assault on Minor Girl: Madras HC [Read Judgment]

Madras HC upholds life imprisonment for assault on minor SC girl, reiterating that a child cannot consent to sex; school records key for age proof.

17 October, 2025 11:45 AM
sc-criticizes-casual-declaration-of-witnesses-as-hostile-upholds-conviction-under-sc-st-act
Trending Judiciary
SC Criticizes Casual Declaration of Witnesses as Hostile, Upholds Conviction under SC/ST Act [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court slams casual practice of declaring witnesses hostile; upholds life imprisonment in SC/ST Act case involving rape of minor girl.

17 October, 2025 11:55 AM
delhi-hc-quashes-22-year-old-complaint-against-advocate-reiterates-that-a-lawyers-office-is-not-a-commercial-activity
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Quashes 22-Year Old Complaint Against Advocate, Reiterates That A Lawyer’s Office Is Not A Commercial Activity [Read Judgment]

Delhi HC quashes 22-year-old complaint against advocate, rules that a lawyer’s office is not a commercial activity under MDP 2001 and Building Bye-Laws.

17 October, 2025 01:42 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email