Summary of Recent judgment

Case: Bhaurao Lokhande & Anr. v State of Maharashtra



Date of Order / Judgment: 23 September, 2024

The Matter Heard by Bench: Justice Dayal, Justice Raghubar, Justice J.R. Mudholkar, Justice V. Ramaswami

Background

The case revolves around the legal implications of second marriage under Indian Penal Code, particularly with regard to the necessary requirements for a marriage to be deemed valid, in order to attract the offence of Bigamy. The appellant, Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande, married Indubai in 1956 and subsequently married Kamlabai in February 1962 while his first marriage was still in existence. He was charged under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code for bigamy, which necessitates the existence of a valid second marriage. The trial court convicted him, which was upheld by the Sessions Court and the High Court, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issues
  • 1. Was the second marriage of Bhaurao Lokhande, solemnized according to the requisite ceremonies and rites?
  • 2. If not, was he liable for bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code?
Observation

The Hon'ble Supreme Court opined that a person must marry another person legally, to be held liable under Section 494 of the IPC 1860. In other words, the marriage must be solemnized so that the same becomes a valid marriage. If the marriage is not performed for it to be a valid marriage, then such marriage is no marriage at all. The court emphasized that even in unconventional forms of marriage like Gandharva marriage, certain essential elements are necessary for validity. The appellants argued that their marriage was not performed with the required religious rites, while the respondents maintained it was valid under the customs of Gandharva marriage.

Decision

The Supreme Court held that the second marriage, between Bhaurao Lokhande and Kamlabai, was not solemnized in accordance with the necessary legal requirements for a valid Hindu marriage. Thus, it could not be considered a valid marriage for the purpose of Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The court concluded that the absence of the necessary rituals invalidated the marriage, and as a result, the conviction was set aside, leading to his acquittal.