In a notable ruling, the Vikroli metropolitan magistrate’s court previously issued charges against a woman, her father, and her husband in November 2007 following a complaint by the man’s first wife.
The complainant, who married the man in March 1990 and had three daughters with him, alleged that he mistreated her and forced her out of their home in July 2005. Three months later, she discovered that her husband had remarried while still legally married to her.
Based on this complaint, the magistrate sought to prosecute the husband for bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the second wife and her father for abetment under Section 109 of the IPC.
In response, the second wife and her father challenged the magistrate’s order in the high court. The prosecution contended that the second wife was responsible for abetting bigamy simply because she was the husband’s second wife.
However, Justice Makarand Karnik dismissed the charges against both the father and daughter. He noted that the complaint lacked sufficient evidence to support any claims of abetment against them.
Justice Karnik stated, “The prosecution against the husband, the principal offender in this case, may continue. However, there is no indication in the complaint about how the applicants have assisted or encouraged the husband in committing this offence.”
He further explained, “The mere assertion that a second marriage took place is not enough to proceed against the applicants without specific allegations that establish a case of abetment.”
This ruling emphasizes the necessity for clear evidence when charging individuals with serious offences like bigamy and abetment, offering important insights into the complexities of marital law in India.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
