The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a Muslim man who marries a second time while his first marriage is still valid cannot be prosecuted under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with bigamy.
A bench led by Justice BP Sharma explained that Section 494 applies only when the second marriage is void due to the subsistence of the first marriage. “In the present case, the parties are governed by Muslim Personal Law, which permits a man to have more than one wife. Therefore, the second marriage is not void merely because the first marriage continues,” the court said.
Bigamy Charge Quashed, Trial for Other Offences to Continue
The court partly allowed a petition by the husband, quashing the bigamy charge filed against him. However, it clarified that the trial will continue for other allegations including cruelty, wrongful confinement, assault, and criminal intimidation, punishable under Sections 498-A, 342, 323, and 506 Part II IPC.
“…The essential ingredient of Section 494 IPC, namely that the second marriage must be void due to the subsistence of the earlier marriage, is not satisfied,” the bench noted.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after the petitioner’s first wife filed a police complaint. She alleged that after their marriage in December 2002, the husband abused her for not bearing a child and later married a second woman in May 2022. She claimed she was pressured to give him ‘Khula,’ or divorce by mutual consent.
The husband’s lawyer argued that Section 494 IPC does not apply to Muslims as per their personal law, which allows up to four wives simultaneously. He cited the Kerala High Court judgment in Venugopal vs. Union of India 2015, which held that Section 494 only applies if a Muslim man marries beyond the four permitted wives.
The first wife’s counsel countered that the Muslim Personal Law would not automatically apply unless a declaration is submitted under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. They argued that the husband is therefore not entitled to have four wives at the same time.
Court Relies on Personal Law and Supreme Court Precedents
The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that Section 494 IPC must be considered alongside the personal law of the parties. It relied on Supreme Court rulings including Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India 1995 and Khursheed Ahmad Khan vs. State of UP 2015, which recognize that Muslim Personal Law allows polygamy.
The court added that even if the wife’s allegations are taken at face value, contracting a second marriage does not fulfill the essential criteria for bigamy under Section 494 IPC. “Continuation of the prosecution for this offence would amount to abuse of the court’s process,” the bench said.
