“Section 17 brings one any marriage ranging from one or two Hindus solemnised just after the beginning of your own Work is gap if at time of such matrimony both party got a husband or wife life style, and that the new arrangements of sections 494 and 495 ipc should implement accordingly. The marriage between a couple Hindus are void because off Part 17 if the two conditions try fulfilled: (i) the marriage is actually solemnised following the beginning of your own Act; (ii) at the big date of such matrimony, both team got a partner lifestyle. In case your labai into the March 1962 cannot be allowed to be ‘solemnised’, you to definitely matrimony are not emptiness of the advantage of Part 17 of Act and you will Part 494 IPC cannot apply at including events to your wedding while sexy Slovenia jente the had a wife lifestyle.”
During the Rakeya Bibi v
twenty eight. Which v. [Heavens 1966 South carolina 614 = 1966 step 1 SCR 539] The matter is actually once again believed when you look at the Priya Bala Ghosh v. For the Gopal Lal v. State Away from Rajasthan [1979 dos SCC 170 = Heavens 1979 Sc 713 = 1979 2 SCR 1171] Murtaza Fazal Ali, J., talking to your Court, noticed just like the not as much as: (SCC p. 173, con el fin de 5)
“[W]right here a spouse agreements one minute matrimony since very first marriage is still subsisting the partner would be guilty of bigamy lower than Area 494 if it is ended up your next relationship is actually a legitimate one in the sense your necessary ceremonies needed for legal reasons or of the personalized was in reality did. ”
29. In view of a lot more than, if one marries another go out inside longevity of their wife, like wedding aside from becoming void not as much as Areas eleven and 17 of one’s Hindu Marriage Act, would also compensate an offense and that people could well be responsible is prosecuted less than Section 494 IPC. When you find yourself Section 17 speaks out-of relationship between two “Hindus”, Point 494 cannot reference any religious denomination.
30. Today, conversion or apostasy doesn’t immediately break down a marriage currently solemnised beneath the Hindu Relationships Operate. They merely provides a ground to own divorce proceedings significantly less than Section 13. The relevant portion of Area thirteen brings as under:
“thirteen. (1) Any marriage solemnised, if just before or following beginning regarding the Work, may, toward a petition displayed because of the either the fresh spouse or even the spouse, getting mixed by the a decree of breakup on the floor one another cluster-
H.P Admn
29. Not as much as Section 10 that provides to own judicial breakup, transformation to another faith is becoming a footing for good ended by endment) Act, 1976. The original marriage, ergo, isn’t influenced plus it continues to subsist. If the “marital” position is not inspired on account of the wedding nevertheless subsisting, his 2nd relationships qua the current relationship could be gap and you may notwithstanding conversion he would become prone to become sued towards the offense from bigamy around Point 494.
32. Alter out of religion will not melt the wedding did beneath the Hindu Relationship Operate anywhere between a couple of Hindus. Apostasy cannot give a conclusion the newest civil financial obligation or the latest matrimonial thread, however, apostasy are a footing having separation lower than Point 13 given that as well as a footing to own judicial breakup not as much as Point 10 of Hindu y. Once we have observed over, the new Hindu y”. An additional marriage, into the lifetime of the fresh new mate, might be emptiness not as much as Parts eleven and you can 17, besides becoming an offense.
33. From inside the Govt. regarding Bombay v. Ganga ILR 1880 4 Bom 330 which naturally was a situation decided before the getting into push of your Hindu Matrimony Operate, it absolutely was stored by the Bombay High Court one to where a beneficial Hindu married lady which have an excellent Hindu husband life ”, she commits new offence out of polyandry because the, because of the mere sales, the previous wedding doesn’t run out. Another choices considering which idea are Budansa Rowther v. Fatima Bi Heavens 1914 Mad 192, Emperor v. Ruri Air 1919 Lah 389 and you can Jamna Devi v. Mul Raj 1907 forty two Pr 1907. Anil Kumar Mukherji ILR 1948 dos Cal 119 it absolutely was held that significantly less than Hindu rules, the brand new apostasy of a single of partners will not reduce brand new relationship. Into the Sayeda Khatoon v. Yards. Obadiah 1944-forty five forty-two CWN 745 it had been kept one a marriage solemnised in the India centered on you to definitely individual law can not be demolished in respect to another individual laws simply because one of several events provides altered their unique religion.
