“Section 17 provides you to definitely one matrimony anywhere between a couple Hindus solemnised immediately after the commencement of one’s Operate are gap when the in the time of these wedding both team got a wife or husband lifestyle, which the fresh terms out of areas 494 and 495 ipc will pertain properly. The wedding anywhere between a couple Hindus try gap because out of Section 17 when the a couple conditions is actually satisfied: (i) the marriage are solemnised adopting the beginning of one’s Work; (ii) during the big date of such marriage, either people had a wife lifestyle. If your labai into the February 1962 can not be allowed to be ‘solemnised’, that matrimony won’t be emptiness by advantage of Area 17 of the Operate and you may Area 494 IPC cannot apply at such as for instance events on the relationships because got a wife lifestyle.”
In the Rakeya Bibi v
twenty eight. That it v. [Air 1966 Sc 614 = 1966 1 SCR 539] The issue was once more believed within the Priya Bala Ghosh v. Inside Gopal Lal v. Condition From Rajasthan [1979 dos SCC 170 = Heavens 1979 Sc 713 = 1979 2 SCR 1171] Murtaza Fazal Ali, J., talking to the Courtroom, seen because around: (SCC p. 173, para poder 5)
“[W]here a spouse agreements one minute relationships once the earliest relationships has been subsisting the newest spouse might possibly be accountable for bigamy less than Part 494 if it’s proved your second marriage try a valid one in the sense that requisite ceremonies requisite by-law otherwise by individualized was in fact actually did. ”
29. Because of the more than, if one marries the next go out during the longevity of their wife, for example marriage apart from being emptiness around Parts eleven and you may 17 of your Hindu Marriage Work, would also create an offense and that people would-be responsible to get charged significantly less than Part 494 IPC. If you find yourself Point 17 speaks off relationships between a couple of “Hindus”, Section 494 doesn’t reference any religious denomination.
31. Now, conversion process or apostasy cannot instantly break down a married relationship currently solemnised beneath the Hindu Matrimony Act. They just brings a ground to possess divorce proceedings lower than Section 13. The relevant percentage of Area thirteen will bring once the significantly less than:
“13. (1) One relationship solemnised, whether or not just before otherwise adopting the beginning in the Work, will get, on the a good petition exhibited by possibly new partner or perhaps the wife, feel demolished by a beneficial decree away from breakup on the floor one to additional party-
H.P Admn
31. Not as much as Part 10 that gives getting official breakup, conversion process to some other religion happens to be a ground having a great finished by the endment) Operate, 1976. The first wedding, thus, is not inspired plus it will continue to subsist. If the “marital” condition is not affected on account of the marriage however subsisting, their 2nd relationships qua the existing wedding was gap and you may regardless of conversion process he would be liable to feel sued towards the offense away from bigamy lower than Area 494.
thirty-two. Alter out of religion doesn’t break down the marriage did within the Hindu Marriage Work between a couple Hindus. Apostasy will not bring to an end brand new municipal financial obligation otherwise brand new matrimonial thread, but apostasy was a ground for separation lower than Section 13 just like the in addition to a ground to possess official separation below Point ten of your Hindu y. While we have observed more than, the fresh new Hindu y”. Another relationship, when you look at the longevity of new lover, would-be void significantly less than Areas eleven and you may 17, along with being an offence.
33. In the Govt. of Bombay v. Ganga ILR 1880 cuatro Bom 330 which of course is actually a case decided prior to the being received by force of your own Hindu Marriage Act, it had been held because of the Bombay Highest Courtroom one where an excellent Hindu married woman that have a Hindu spouse way of life ”, she commits the latest offence from polyandry while the, because of the mere transformation, the last wedding doesn’t run out. Another decisions based on it idea is actually Budansa Rowther v. Fatima Bi Sky 1914 Crazy 192, Emperor v. Ruri Sky 1919 Lah 389 and you may Jamna Devi v. Mul Raj 1907 44 Public relations 1907. Anil Kumar Mukherji ILR 1948 2 Cal 119 it actually was stored one to not as much as Hindu rules, the new apostasy of one of your own partners will not reduce the latest relationship. Inside the Sayeda Khatoon v. M. Obadiah 1944-45 forty-two CWN 745 it absolutely was stored that a wedding solemnised within the Asia predicated on you to personal law can’t be mixed according to some other private law simply because they among the activities has actually altered their particular religion.