Site

Law Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

(Guest)

A bigamist deserves the toughest punishment-supreme court

Bigamist deserves tough sentence: Supreme Court

SOURCE - https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_bigamist-deserves-tough-sentence-supreme-court_1568480

Sharing its concern with a woman who was lured to marriage by a man who had concealed his subsisting marriage, the Supreme Court has ruled that he is liable to face the criminal prosecution for committing bigamy, cheating and cruelty.

Moreover, it’s not the second woman alone who can file this complaint but the first “legally married” woman too is entitled to bring the legal machinery in action.

The court has also held that that the charge of cruelty can also be leveled by both the women against the same spouse. The court scrapped a judgment passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court two years ago that allowed an accused police official’s law suit that his second wife could not complain of cruelty against him for she is not legally married and that the marriage could be nullified.

A. Subash Babu, who was married to Sharda and had two children from her, “concealed” this fact and married another woman. When she learnt about his first marriage, she filed a criminal complaint against him, accusing him of cheating, bigamy, fraud and cruelty.

A bench of Justice JM Panchal and Justice HL Gokhale held that a married man who by “passing himself off as unmarried” induces an innocent woman to become,as she thinks his wife,but in reality his mistress, “commits one of the grossest forms of frauds known to law”.There, he must be awarded severe punishment under section 495 which begins with the words “whoever commits the offence” of bigamy.

Reply Follow

8 Replies

N.K.Assumi (Advocate) 18 August 2011

Great! and thanks for sharing:

Saurabh..V (Law Consultant) 18 August 2011

@Princess

You are again one of the many of which @Roshni belong. You guys get swayed by bold headlines which are in favor of women and thrashes men. Now see the below line as per your own post:

Where did the Supreme Court generalized 'Bigamy'? This case has a peculiar situation that the man concealed his subsisting marriage.

There are instances where woman is ready to marry a married man on her own free will. The cases of 'Bigamy' are peculiar and not general. Please do not misguide the audience and do not create confusion!

Needless to mention, the statute applies common and same principle in case of man and woman in this section. So let's not generalize and violate the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence.

//peace

/Saurabh..V

gaury..fight to win (Education) 18 August 2011

Saurabh u have to protest to everything which are in favour of women.This news neither favour women and u yourself has admitted that statute bigamy is same for both man and woman.They why is this discontentment??

What do u want???To support man whatever he does??Anything that are against man are not digestable by you....in some cases men are guilty(like in this news)...

Supreme Court has not generalised bigamy, does it mean we wont read news/judgement on this topic??

If so why did you read it??

1 Like

(Guest)

Sorry Saurabh bhaiya for hurting your feelings.I did not know this news will upset you so much.

Bhaiya,you can sue this newspaper DNAindia for publishing such a misleading heading "BIGAMIST DESERVES TOUGHEST PUNISHMENT-SC".They have mislead lakhs and lakhs of people who did not read the entire news,but only this heading.Before this heading spoils the life of all such readers,please do something bhaiyaa...

I agree with you ,that people will not read the entire news,but only the heading and conclude what this news is talking about.

As far as I am concerned,mujhe maaf karo bhaisaahab.I did not decide with dnaindia,that this will be the most suitable heading for this news.I do not work for this newspaper.

I agree with you that Roshni kuch bhi post kar deti hai.Mai bhi uski nakal karti rahti hu.Par kya karu.Mai nakalchi bandariya hu naa..

priya (student) 18 August 2011

nothing against fraudulent keep? SC shud also recognise that.

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity) 18 August 2011

In this case,the keep was unaware of the man being already married.So she cannot be called fraudulent.Rather she deserves our praises for immediately bringing this cheater to court,instead of continuing to live with him even after knowing of his marital status.

Saurabh..V (Law Consultant) 19 August 2011

@Author & @Gaury

See the below post which has very good explanatory comments from @Utpala.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/A-bigamist-deserves-the-toughest-punishment-supreme-court-42563.asp

Learn to think postive. If you only post news here so that you earn points and gain credits and draw attention, please stop that. If you post it to elicit members free opinion, be ready to hear positive and negative both.

A feminist is a person........ ( I M PLANNING TO MAKE A DEFINITION) ... Wait for my upcoming post on this :)

//peace

/Saurabh..V

(Guest)

Originally posted by :Saurabh..V
"	@Author & @Gaury See the below post which has very good explanatory comments from @Utpala. https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/A-bigamist-deserves-the-toughest-punishment-supreme-court-42563.asp Learn to think postive. If you only post news here so that you earn points and gain credits and draw attention, please stop that. If you post it to elicit members free opinion, be ready to hear positive and negative both. A feminist is a person........ ( I M PLANNING TO MAKE A DEFINITION) ... Wait for my upcoming post on this :) //peace /Saurabh..V	"

I did not support bigamy.I replied to relevancy of Atmaa's post in that thread.He made cruelty by one spouse by getting married again equal to some specific custom of specific region.

1 Like