Detailed Description Of Concealment Not Mandatory Under Section 27 Evidence Act: Bombay High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Child Is Not A Pawn To Prove Mother's Adultery: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Husband's DNA Test Petition In Desertion Divorce Case Shareholder Ratification Cannot Cure Fraud Under SEBI's PFUTP Regulations: Supreme Court Restores Rs. 70 Lakh Penalty on Company When High Court Judges Themselves Disagree on the Answer, Can a Law Graduate Be Penalised for Getting It Wrong? Supreme Court Says No Superficial Burns Don't Mean Silence: Supreme Court Explains Why 80-90% Burn Victim Could Still Make a Valid Dying Declaration Daughter's Eyewitness Account, Dying Declaration Seal Husband's Fate: Supreme Court Upholds Life Sentence for Wife-Burning Murder Supreme Court Rejects Rs. 106 Crore Compensation Claim; Directs SECL to Supply Coal to Prakash Industries at 2014 or 2019 Prices for Wrongfully Suspended Period Section 319 CrPC | Trial Court Cannot Conduct Mini Trial While Deciding Application to Summon Additional Accused: Supreme Court Accused Can't Be Left Without Documents To Defend: Calcutta High Court Directs Adjudicating Authority To First Decide Whether Complete 'Relied Upon Documents' Were Served In PMLA Proceedings Husband Who Took Voluntary Retirement at 47 Cannot Escape Maintenance Duty: Delhi High Court Upholds ₹10,000/Month to Wife and Daughter Cannot Claim Monopoly Over a Deity's Name: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Trademark Injunction Against 'Kshetrapal Construction' Eviction Appeal Cannot Require Actual Surrender Of Possession, Symbolic Possession Sufficient: J&K High Court Amendment Introducing Time-Barred Relief And Changing Nature Of Suit Cannot Be Allowed: Karnataka High Court Counter Claim Is An Independent Suit: MP High Court Rules Properties Beyond Territorial Jurisdiction Cannot Be Dragged Into Counter Claim Co-Sharer Cannot Be Bound By Passage Carved Out Without His Consent: Punjab & Haryana High Court Modifies Concurrent Decrees ‘Prima Facie True’ Is Enough to Deny Liberty: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses Bail in Babbar Khalsa Terror Conspiracy Case High Court Cannot Quash FIR for Forgery When Handwriting Expert's Report Is Still Awaited: Supreme Court Supreme Court Calls for Paternity Leave Law, Says Father's Absence in Child's Early Years Leaves a "Quiet Cost" That Lasts a Lifetime Three-Month Age Cap for Adoptive Mothers' Maternity Benefit Struck Down: Supreme Court Reads Down Section 60(4) of Social Security Code Bank Cannot Rely on Charter Party Agreement to Justify Remittance Contrary to Customer's Instructions: Supreme Court 19 Candidates Linked to Accused, Papers of Five Subjects Leaked: Allahabad High Court Upholds Cancellation of UP Assistant Professor Exam Result

If Marriage is Not Valid, It is No Marriage in the Eyes of Law – Allahabad High Court Quashes Bigamy Charges Due to Lack of Valid Solemnization

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court, in a significant ruling on April 25, 2024, underscored the necessity of valid solemnization in marriage ceremonies under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), leading to the quashing of bigamy charges against Nisha, the revisionist.

Legal Point of Judgement: The court meticulously analyzed the essential requirements for a valid marriage, particularly focusing on the absence of the ‘Saptapadi’ (seven steps ritual), which is crucial under the Hindu Marriage Act. Justice Dr. Gautam Chowdhary emphasized, “If the marriage is not a valid marriage, it is no marriage in the eyes of law.”

Facts and Issues: The revisionist, Nisha, was summoned for allegedly marrying Shubham Sharma without obtaining a divorce from her first husband, Vijay Singh. However, she contested the validity of her second marriage and the performance of essential rites. The prosecution’s inability to prove the solemnization of the second marriage formed the core issue of the legal battle.

Validity of Second Marriage: The court noted that no substantial evidence was presented to prove the performance of ‘Saptapadi’, a mandatory ritual for validating a Hindu marriage. Justice Chowdhary pointed out, “the word ‘solemnize’ means, in connection with a marriage, ‘to celebrate the marriage with proper ceremonies and in due form.’”

Application of Legal Precedents: The judgment extensively referenced past Supreme Court rulings that allow for the quashing of proceedings where the probability of conviction is minimal or where the proceedings seem malafide. The court emphasized preventing the misuse of legal processes and ensuring justice.

Decision on Delay Condonation: The court also condoned a 275-day delay in filing the criminal revision, acknowledging the affidavit submitted and mutual consent of the involved parties.

Decision: Concluding, the court quashed the summoning order related to the bigamy charges under Section 494 IPC against Nisha due to the absence of evidence proving valid marriage solemnization. However, proceedings related to other charges under Sections 504 and 506 IPC will continue.

Date of Decision: April 25, 2024

Shubham Sharma Vs. Nisha

Latest Legal News