Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande v State of Maharashtra

Facts

• The accused was alleged to have entered into a second marriage while the first marriage subsisted, and was prosecuted for bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's evidence regarding the second marriage did not clearly establish that the essential ceremonies required for a valid Hindu marriage (such as saptapadi, where customarily required) had been duly performed.

Issue

1. Whether a second "marriage" that is not shown to have been performed with the essential ceremonies required by personal law can sustain a conviction for bigamy under Section 494 IPC.

Held

• A conviction for bigamy requires the prosecution to prove the second marriage was validly performed, satisfying the essential ceremonies mandated by the relevant personal law. Mere cohabitation or holding out as husband and wife is insufficient; the ceremonial requirements of a valid marriage must be established. Since the essential ceremonies were not proved in this case, the second "marriage" was not a marriage in the eyes of law, and the charge of bigamy could not be sustained. The words "whoever marries" in Section 494 IPC contemplate a valid marriage, not merely a ceremony purporting to be one.

Ratio Decidendi

A prosecution for bigamy under Section 494 IPC cannot succeed unless the second marriage is shown to have been solemnised with the essential ceremonies required under the applicable personal law. Absent such proof, no valid marriage exists in law, and there is nothing to found a bigamy charge upon.