Suresh Chandra Ghosh [1971 step one SCC 864 = Air 1971 Sc 1153 = 1971 3 SCR 961]

Suresh Chandra Ghosh [1971 step one SCC 864 = Air 1971 Sc 1153 = 1971 3 SCR 961]

“Section 17 provides one to people relationship ranging from a few Hindus solemnised once the commencement of your own Operate was emptiness in the event that in the time of these wedding often team had a husband or wife living, and therefore the brand new arrangements of parts 494 and you will 495 ipc shall implement properly. The wedding ranging from several Hindus is actually void because of Part 17 in the event that one or two criteria try satisfied: (i) the wedding is solemnised adopting the beginning of one’s Act; (ii) on date of such matrimony, sometimes team got a partner living. In case your labai during the February 1962 can not be supposed to be ‘solemnised’, one wedding will never be void by the virtue regarding Point 17 of one’s Work and Section 494 IPC does not affect such as activities with the marriage as the had a wife traditions.”

When you look at the Rakeya Bibi v

28. That it v. [Sky 1966 Sc 614 = 1966 step one SCR 539] The condition try once again believed into the Priya Bala Ghosh v. For the Gopal Lal v. County Of Rajasthan [1979 2 SCC 170 = Air 1979 Sc 713 = 1979 2 SCR 1171] Murtaza Fazal Ali, J., speaking towards the Legal, observed since below: (SCC p. 173, para 5)

“[W]here a partner deals the next matrimony because the very first matrimony has been subsisting this new partner would-be accountable for bigamy significantly less than Area 494 if it is proved that the second wedding are a legitimate one out of the sense that necessary ceremonies required by-law otherwise by the custom had been indeed performed. ”

30. Because of your significantly more than, if one marries an extra go out within the longevity of their partner, eg relationship except that are gap less than Parts eleven and you can 17 of the Hindu Relationships Act, could compensate an offense and that individual could be accountable are prosecuted under Point 494 IPC. Whenever you are Part 17 speaks out-of relationships ranging from several “Hindus”, Area 494 will not consider people spiritual denomination.

31. Now, sales otherwise apostasy does not automatically reduce a married relationship currently solemnised underneath the Hindu Relationship Work. They merely brings a ground to own breakup lower than Part thirteen. The appropriate portion of Section thirteen will bring once the not as much as:

“13. (1) One matrimony solemnised, whether in advance of or adopting the beginning associated with Operate, could possibly get, into a great petition showed from the sometimes the spouse or the partner, end up being dissolved of the a great decree of split up on the floor you to the other class-

H.P Admn

30. Significantly less than Section ten that provides to possess official separation, conversion process to a different religion has started to become a footing getting an effective concluded from the endment) Work, 1976. The original wedding, therefore, isn’t influenced plus it will continue to subsist. If your “marital” position isn’t impacted due to the marriage nonetheless subsisting, their next wedding qua the existing relationship would be gap and you can notwithstanding transformation however become liable to getting prosecuted on offence out-of bigamy around Part 494.

thirty-two. Transform away from religion cannot melt the marriage did underneath the Hindu Relationship Work anywhere between a couple of Hindus. Apostasy cannot give a conclusion the fresh new civil obligations or the matrimonial thread, but apostasy was a footing to own split up around Area 13 once the as well as a ground for official breakup under Part 10 of Hindu y. Once we have observed above, the brand new Hindu y”. One minute relationships, from inside the lifetime of new partner, is void less than Areas 11 and 17, besides becoming an offense.

33. During the Govt. of Bombay v. Ganga ILR 1880 4 Bom 330 se her and therefore without a doubt are an instance felt like prior to the coming into push of one’s Hindu Relationships Work, it actually was kept because of the Bombay Higher Judge you to where good Hindu partnered woman which have a beneficial Hindu partner lifestyle ”, she commits the fresh new offence out-of polyandry while the, of the simple transformation, the prior matrimony cannot run-out. One other choices centered on so it concept is Budansa Rowther v. Fatima Bi Air 1914 Resentful 192, Emperor v. Ruri Heavens 1919 Lah 389 and you can Jamna Devi v. Mul Raj 1907 49 Advertising 1907. Anil Kumar Mukherji ILR 1948 dos Cal 119 it had been stored one around Hindu laws, the apostasy of 1 of partners doesn’t reduce brand new marriage. For the Sayeda Khatoon v. Meters. Obadiah 1944-forty five 49 CWN 745 it absolutely was held one to a married relationship solemnised in the Asia considering you to personal law can not be dissolved in respect to some other personal rules simply because they among the many events has actually changed their unique religion.

Commenti Facebook
Sviluppo Web by Studioidea - © Copyright 2018 - B-Geek S.r.l - P.I 07634480722 - All rights reserved.