Suresh Chandra Ghosh [1971 step 1 SCC 864 = Sky 1971 South carolina 1153 = 1971 3 SCR 961]

25 Jan Suresh Chandra Ghosh [1971 step 1 SCC 864 = Sky 1971 South carolina 1153 = 1971 3 SCR 961]

“Section 17 will bring one to people matrimony between a couple of Hindus solemnised immediately after the start of your Operate was void when the from the go out of such marriage both people got a husband or wife life style, and this the arrangements of sections 494 and you can 495 ipc will incorporate correctly. The marriage anywhere between a couple of Hindus was void in view from Part 17 if a couple standards are met: (i) the marriage are solemnised pursuing the beginning of your own Work; (ii) at the time of these marriage, often cluster had a wife life style. Whether your labai inside March 1962 can not be supposed to be ‘solemnised’, you to relationships may not be gap because of the virtue out of Point 17 of your own Operate and you may Part 494 IPC doesn’t affect such as parties toward relationship since got a wife traditions.”

Inside the Rakeya Bibi v

twenty eight. Which v. [Air 1966 Sc 614 = 1966 step one SCR 539] The issue are again experienced inside the Priya Bala Ghosh v. For the Gopal Lal v. State Regarding Rajasthan [1979 2 SCC 170 = Air 1979 South carolina 713 = 1979 dos SCR 1171] Murtaza Fazal Ali, J., talking on the Legal, observed since lower than: (SCC p. 173, con el fin de 5)

“[W]right here a wife contracts an additional relationship since earliest matrimony continues to be subsisting this new mate would be responsible for bigamy not as much as Part 494 in case it is turned out that 2nd wedding was a valid one in the sense your expected ceremonies needed legally otherwise of the customized was basically indeed did. ”

31. Because of a lot more than, if a person marries the next time inside the longevity of his spouse, such as for instance relationship aside from being emptiness significantly less than Sections eleven and you may 17 of your own Hindu Relationship Work, would create an offence and that person might be responsible to be sued below Point 494 IPC. When you find yourself Point 17 talks off marriage ranging from one or two “Hindus”, Part 494 doesn’t refer to one religious denomination.

29. Today, transformation or apostasy does not instantly melt a wedding currently solemnised underneath the Hindu Marriage Act. It just brings a footing to possess divorce case less than Section 13. The appropriate portion of Section thirteen will bring once the lower than:

“thirteen. (1) One matrimony solemnised, if ahead of or pursuing the beginning with the Operate, can get, with the a petition demonstrated because of the possibly the spouse and/or wife, end up being dissolved because of the good decree out-of separation on to the ground that one other group-

H.P Admn

29. Not as much as Part ten that offers having official separation, transformation to some other religion has become a ground having a concluded by endment) Operate, 1976. The initial relationship, thus, is not impacted and it continues to subsist. In the event the “marital” standing is not affected because of the marriage nevertheless subsisting, Romanian kauniita naisia their next marriage qua the present marriage would be emptiness and you will despite transformation he would getting liable to end up being prosecuted towards offence away from bigamy less than Point 494.

thirty two. Changes off faith cannot break down the wedding did according to the Hindu Matrimony Work between two Hindus. Apostasy will not bring to an-end this new civil financial obligation otherwise the fresh matrimonial thread, however, apostasy was a ground getting divorce or separation not as much as Point 13 since in addition to a ground to own official breakup lower than Area 10 of your own Hindu y. Even as we have experienced a lot more than, the new Hindu y”. A moment relationship, for the longevity of the brand new lover, might be void significantly less than Areas 11 and you can 17, and getting an offence.

33. When you look at the Govt. out-of Bombay v. Ganga ILR 1880 4 Bom 330 and this however are an instance decided ahead of the coming into force of your own Hindu Matrimony Work, it actually was held because of the Bombay Large Courtroom you to definitely in which a Hindu partnered lady that have an excellent Hindu spouse life ”, she commits the newest offense away from polyandry as, from the mere conversion process, the last relationships will not run-out. Another choices based on which idea is Budansa Rowther v. Fatima Bi Sky 1914 Annoyed 192, Emperor v. Ruri Air 1919 Lah 389 and you can Jamna Devi v. Mul Raj 1907 44 Pr 1907. Anil Kumar Mukherji ILR 1948 2 Cal 119 it was stored you to definitely below Hindu law, the brand new apostasy of 1 of one’s spouses cannot break down new relationship. Inside Sayeda Khatoon v. Meters. Obadiah 1944-45 forty-two CWN 745 it was kept one to a wedding solemnised in the Asia centered on one private legislation cannot be demolished according to another private rules simply because one of many parties has changed their unique faith.