Suggestions regarding awaiting divorcee issue

Your husband married during the lifetime of his first wife as his earlier marriage was not dissolved by the court as on the date of his marriage to you. He is, therefore, liable for the offence of bigamy u/s 494 IPC. You should file a private complaint in the court through a lawyer to bring him to book u/s 494 IPC.

376 IPC is not applicable to the facts of this case. It will not stand its ground in the court as the marriage, even though void on account of his first marriage still subsisting as on the date of your marriage to him, was solemnised. Husband cannot be prosecuted for the offence of rape for having s*xual intercourse with his wife. Pursue the case vigorously against him. It will be difficult for him to escape his liability u/s 494 IPC.

My Dear Damsel in Distress, 

Even inspite of all opinion to the contrary(The police/lawyers or even the judge may be unsupportive of this), I still feel that your consent to s*xual intercourse was obtained keeping you under a misconception of fact. The misconception is that he 'would' marry you (obviously after he finalises his divorce in due course) you never sought marriage before his divorce from the earlier marriage. But he knew it for a fact that he would never marry you, and for him you were just a play thing. The fact that he could not marry you at that point is inconsequential. This is out and out s*xual intercourse under a false promise of marriage. This is the just and logical reading of the law.

And thanks for 

My Dear Damsel in Distress, 

Even inspite of all opinion to the contrary(The police/lawyers or even the judge may be unsupportive of this), I still feel that your consent to s*xual intercourse was obtained keeping you under a misconception of fact. The misconception is that he 'would' marry you (obviously after he finalises his divorce in due course) you never sought marriage before his divorce from the earlier marriage. But he knew it for a fact that he would never marry you, and for him you were just a play thing. The fact that he could not marry you at that point is inconsequential. This is out and out s*xual intercourse under a false promise of marriage. This is the just and logical reading of the law.

And thanks 

Thank you so much bharath, I know even before registering this complaint you had given me assurance that this case would surely stand and though initially police refused to take this case and few lawyers suggested this case doesnt stand , it was onlt becoz of your valuable suggestions  and timely guidance and my perservarance was i able to get him arrested for few days , Thanks for all your support and timely suggestions but in bangalore few lawyers are so adamant in understanding about this "misconception of facts" which makes me worried .

The statement of facts has been surprisingly modified and truncated. I,therefore, refrain from placing on board my reasoning  for disagreeing with Bharat's views.