High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court Allahabad High Court Denies Tax Refund for Hybrid Vehicle Purchased Before Electric Vehicle Exemption Policy Entering A Room with Someone Cannot, By Any Stretch Of Imagination, Be Considered Consent For Sexual Intercourse: Bombay High Court No Specific Format Needed for Dying Declaration, Focus on Mental State and Voluntariness: Calcutta High Court Delhi High Court Allows Direct Appeal Under DVAT Act Without Tribunal Reference for Pre-2005 Tax Periods NDPS | Mere Registration of Cases Does Not Override Presumption of Innocence: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Previous Antecedents and No Communal Tension: High Court Grants Bail in Caste-Based Abuse Case Detention of Petitioner Would Amount to Pre-Trial Punishment: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail in Dowry Harassment Case Loss of Confidence Must Be Objectively Proven to Deny Reinstatement: Kerala High Court Reinstates Workman After Flawed Domestic Enquiry Procedural lapses should not deny justice: Andhra High Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case Canteen Subsidy Constitutes Part of Dearness Allowance Under EPF Act: Gujarat High Court Concurrent Findings Demonstrate Credibility – Jharkhand High Court Affirms Conviction in Cheating Case 125 Cr.P.C | Financial responsibility towards dependents cannot be shirked due to personal obligations: Punjab and Haryana High Court Mere Acceptance of Money Without Proof of Demand is Not Sufficient to Establish Corruption Charges Gujrat High Court Evidence Insufficient to Support Claims: Orissa High Court Affirms Appellate Court’s Reversal in Wrongful Confinement and Defamation Case Harmonious Interpretation of PWDV Act and Senior Citizens Act is Crucial: Kerala High Court in Domestic Violence Case

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

Similar News