GOPAL LAL versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Citation: [1979] 2 S.C.R. 1171 · Decided: 30-01-1979 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
" 
.. 
' 
GOPALLAL 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN 
January 30, 1979 
[S. MuRTAZA FAZAL Au AND A. D. KosHAL, JJ.] 
1171 
Bigamy, offence of under section 494 f.P.C.-Ad1nission and legal evidence 
of actual 1narriage by custom of nata marriage attracts the provisions of sec-
tio11 494 l.P.C. 
A 
B 
~ 
Nata 1narriage by customs and therefore void under section 17 of the lfindu 
-,.,Jarriage Act, 1955-Whether voidness of a marriage under section 17 of the 
C 
H.M.A., 1955 disattracts the applicability of· the provisions of section 494 
.-'f 
l.P.C. 
After having fallen out and parted comp:lny "With his wife Kanchan in the 
year 1963, the appellant, belonging to Telli communiLy contracted a second 
marriage prevalent amongst his community with Gopi on 20th March 1969. A 
complaint filed by his first wife ended in his 
conviction under se.ction 494 
D 
I.P.C. and sentence of two years RJ. and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, the conviction 
and sentence having been upheld by the Raiasth&n lligh Court. 
Dismissing the appeal by special leave, the Court, 
HELD : 1. The second marriage was a valid marriage 
according to the 
custom of the nata marriage prevalent in the Telli community which requires 
the following two essential ceremonies:-
). - -
(a) that the husband should take a pitcher full of weter from the head 
;:of the prospective wife, and 
(b) that the wife should wear chura by the husband. 
E 
'*" 
The prosecution through PWs. 2, 3, 4 and 5 having proved that these cere-
F 
monies have been duly performed, that there was such a custom which re-
quires the said ceremonies having been admitted by the defence witnesses 3 
and 5 and the validity of the first marriage not having been disputed, ·Section 
494 I.P.C. applies in terms and the appellant must be held to have con1nutted 
the c,f!ence of Bigamy as contemplated by section 494 I.P.C. 
[1'176A-EJ 
f 
2. The combined effect of section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act and section 
G 
494 I.P.C. is that when a person contracts a second ntarriage afler the coming 
• 
into force of the said Act 1vhile the first niarriage is subsistinf?, such a person 
coQunits the offence of bigamy. 
[1174 El 
Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 makes it absolutely clear that 
the provi5icn has to be read in harmony and conjunction with the provisions of 
section 494 I.P.C., the essential ingredients of which are : (i) tlmt the accused 
spouse must have contracted the first maniage (ii) that while the first marriage 
H 
was subsisting the spouse conc-erned must have contracted a second marriage, 
and (iii) that both the marriages must be v..alid in the sense that the necessary 
1172 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1979] 2 S.C.R. 
A 
ceremonies required by the personal law governing the parties had been duly 
performed and (iv) the second marriage must have become void by VlflUe of 
the fact that it had taken place in the !ifo timo of one of the ;pauses. [ll 73F-B., 
Jl74A·Cl 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
3. Where a spouse contracts n second marriage ·while the first marriage is 
still subsisting the spouse would be guilty of bigamy under section 494, l.P.C. 
if it is proved that the second marriage v.1as a valid one in the sense that the 
necessary ceremonies required by law or by custom have been actually per·-
formed. 
The voidness of the marriage under section 17 of the Hindu Marriage 
Act is in fact one of the cssentia·1 ingredients of section 494 because the second 
1narriage wilJ became void only because of tho provisions of section 17 of the 
Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, the contention that the second marriage being 
void section 494 I.P.C. will have no applicatio11 is not correct. 
[1175F-G] 
Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande and Anr. v. State of Maltarashtra 
and 
Ors.; 
[1965]2 S.C.R. 837; Kanwal Rani and Ors. v. The Hbnachal Pradesh 
Adn1i-
nistratio11, [1966],1 S.C.R. 
539 and Priya 
Bala 
Ghosh v. 
Suresh 
Chandra 
Ghosh; [1973] 3 S.C.R. 961 applied. 
[Bigamy being a serious offence for which the 
maximum 
punishn1ent 1.3 
seven years, the Court while maintaining the conviction reduced the sentcn;;e 
to one year.] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 255 
of 1973. 
· 
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order 
dated 
16-7-73 of the Rajasthan High Court in S.B. Cr!. Revn. No. 309/73. 
A. N. Mui/a and B. P. Singh for the Appellant. 
Sobhag Mal Jain and S. K. Jain for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
FAzAL Au, J.-This appeal by special leave is directed

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.