Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande V. State of Maharashtra summary

BHAURAO SHANKAR LOKHANDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

FEBRUARY 1, 1965

CASE FOR SECTION 7 AND 17 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT 

Facts of the case : 

The appellant in this case married Indubai in around 1956 and then in February 1962, married to Kamlabai. Therefore the petition was filled before the court to declare the second marriage with Kamlabai as void ab initio and charge the appellant under section 17 of Hindu Marriage Act and under section 494 of IPC.

Contention of the parties : 

Appellant : The husband contended that the offence under section 17 of the act is not committed as the second marriage is not solemnized. 

Complainant : They contended that second marriage was completely solemnized as per the prevailing valid customs. They also contended that even if the marriage was not solemnized, the appellant is still liable for bigamy. 

Question before the court :

  1. Whether the marriage was solemnized or not.
  2. Whether the appellant can be convicted even if the marriage was not solemnized.

JUDGEMENT

The court in this case observed that the prima facie expression of 'whoever marries' should be taken as 'whovever validly marries' . Thus the court opined that if the marriage is not solemnized, then the person cannot be convicted with the offence of bigamy. 
Moreover with relation to the solemnization of the second marriage, it was stated by the complainant that Gandharva form of marriage was applied which is valid form of marriage as per the customs. The court then has to check whether the essential ceremonies were followed as per the prevailing customs or as per the Hindu Marriage Act. It was observed on the witness point of view that the ceremonies conducted during the marriage were somewhat altered from what it was some 5-10 years back. Therefore the court concluded that if the practices are altered, that means that the custom was not followed and as the altered ceremonies are not in practice from a long time as to be capable of becoming a custom, thats why it can be concluded the essential ceremonies were not followed. Thus the court held that the second marriage was not solemnized and thus the appellant has not committed the offence of bigamy under section 17 of the act and is not entitled to punishment under section 494 of IPC.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Kailash Wati V. Ajodhia Parkash case summary

Image
KAILASH WATI Vs. AJODHIA PARKASH PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT  19 NOV 1976 CASE UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. Question before the court Whether the hindu marriage act sanctify or recognise (what may be called as) week end marriage as of a right at the unilateral desire of the wife. Facts of the case The appellant smt. Kailash Wati was married to the respondent Ajodhia Parkash in June 1964. Both of them before marriage were posted as village level teachers. Wife at her parental village of Bilga and husband at kot Ise Khan. After marriage the wife was transferred to her husband's station and they lived together in the matrimonial home for 8-9 months. Contention of the parties Husband : The allegation of the husband is that the wife has got herself transferred back to her parental village and ever since has been residing there with her parents against his wish. Therefore he filled an application for the restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. 
Read more

Savitri Pandey V. Prem Chandra Pandey summary

Image
SAVITRI PANDEY Vs. PREM CHANDRA PANDEY SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  2002 CASE FOR SECTION 13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT ON THE GROUNDS OF CRUELTY AND DESERTION Facts of the case :  The appellant - wife approached the court for the dissolution of marriage under section 13 of HMA alleging cruelty and desertion against the husband.  Contention of the parties :  Petitioner : Petitioner plead for the dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the husband. Respondent  : Respondent - husband argued that no acts of cruelty were performed to the wife and the petitioner is trying to take advantage of her own wrong.  JUDGEMENT :  The trial court passed the decree in favour of the wife. The court observed that although nothing can establish cruelty against husband, desertion by husband provides sufficient grounds for dissolution of marriage.    High court opined that there was nothing to prove cruelty as against husband and further there was also nothing to prove the desertion by th
Read more

Swaraj Garg V. K. M. Garg summary

Image
SWARAJ GARG  Vs. K.M. GARG DELHI HIGH COURT MARCH 7, 1978 . CASE UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT Question before the court : Where will be the matrimonial home located after the marriage when both the parties are gainfully employed and there does not exist any agreement either implied or written before the marriage.  Facts of the case : The wife Swaraj - petitioner lived in her village, Sunam, from 1956 and techer at the the school. She was the head mistress at government high school in 1969. She got married to the respondent in 1964. The husband was not having a satisfactory job and earn only 500 p/m in Delhi where he resides. She came to live with her husband for some time and then grt back to her village and continue living there. The Husband therefore filed the petition under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights.  Contention of the parties :  Petitioner  : The petitioner argued that respondent's condition is not satisfactory that he can maint
Read more