-
by Admin
05 December 2025 4:19 PM
Apex court in recent judgement (Musstt Rehana Begum vs State of Assam & Anr) observed that High Court was not justified in concluding that the issue as to whether the appellant had a subsisting prior marriage was a ‘highly contentious matter’ which has to be tried on the basis of the evidence on the record.
Respondent no.2 filed a complaint stating that he and the appellant were married in accordance with the tenets of Muslim law - came to know that the appellant was previously married to another person - suppressing the fact that she had a subsisting marriage - committed an offence punishable under Section 495 of the IPC - Appellant alleged- first marriage with second respondent on 11 Jan 1996 – suffered matrimonial abuse – demand for dowry - appellant lodged criminal case - second respondent forwarded a purported divorce certificate through the Sadar Kazi - Family Court declared the divorce as null and void on 20 July 2017 - Appellant filed quashing - High Court dismissed the petition on the ground - highly disputed" whether the appellant entered into a marital tie with another person prior to the marriage - whether the earlier marriage had ended in a valid divorce - aggrieved appellant approached Supreme Court.
Supreme court Held - High Court consider other materials before quashing - appellant and respondent no.2 parties to the decision of the Family Court - no contentious material or disputed issues of evidence arise - allowing the criminal proceeding to proceed - an abuse of the process - not justified in concluding that prior marriage a ‘highly contentious matter’ – Quashing allowed
Supreme Court observed that when exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. That is the function of the trial Judge.
D.D- January 21, 2022
Musstt Rehana Begum Versus State of Assam Anr
