The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings in a bigamy case, holding that mere allegations of an illicit relationship do not constitute an offence under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unless a valid second marriage is clearly established.
Justice R. Nataraj ruled that the trial court had wrongly taken cognizance of the offence against the accused persons, including the husband, the alleged partner, and the couple’s children.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a private complaint filed by Manjula P., who alleged that her husband T. Balan had developed an illicit relationship with another woman, Vijayalakshmi.
Read also:- Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in NDPS Case Over Illegal Search Procedure
She claimed that the two were living together as husband and wife and that Balan had effectively entered into a second marriage during the subsistence of their marriage.
The complainant further alleged that their children were aware of and supported the relationship, and therefore should also face prosecution.
Based on the complaint, the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru, took cognizance of offences under Section 494 read with Section 34 IPC and issued summons to the accused.
Aggrieved by this decision, the accused approached the Karnataka High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings.
Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners argued that the trial court had committed a legal error by prosecuting persons other than the spouse for an alleged offence of bigamy.
The counsel contended that under Section 494 IPC, only the spouse who contracts a second marriage during the lifetime of the first spouse can be prosecuted.
It was also argued that the complaint did not specify when or where the alleged second marriage took place.
Instead, the complaint only suggested that the husband and the woman were living in an illicit relationship, which by itself does not amount to bigamy under criminal law.
On the other hand, the complainant’s counsel argued that the children and the alleged partner had supported the relationship and should therefore be held responsible for abetting the offence.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Warns of Attaching State Treasury Over ₹47 Crore Victim Compensation Delay
The Karnataka High Court examined the legal framework of Section 494 IPC and noted that the offence of bigamy arises only when a person contracts a valid second marriage while the first marriage is still subsisting.
The Court emphasised that:
“An offence under Section 494 IPC would be attracted only when a person marries another during the lifetime of his or her spouse.”
Justice Nataraj further clarified that merely living in a relationship or having an alleged illicit relationship does not automatically amount to marriage for the purposes of criminal prosecution.
The Court also relied on decisions of the Supreme Court, which have held that persons other than the spouse cannot ordinarily be prosecuted under Section 494 IPC.
After examining the complaint and the evidence on record, the High Court found that the complainant had failed to provide any material showing that a second marriage had actually taken place.
The Court held that the trial court had incorrectly assumed the existence of a marriage without any supporting allegations or proof.
Accordingly, the Karnataka High Court allowed the petitions and quashed the order dated 1 October 2018 passed by the trial court.
As a result, the criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 3630/2018 pending before the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru were set aside.
