Second Wife Not Guilty of Abetment to Bigamy, Says High Court
A High Court ruling has clarified that a second wife cannot be prosecuted for abetment to bigamy simply because she married a man already in a subsisting marriage. The judgment came after a case involving a magistrate’s court in Vikhroli, which had issued a process against the second wife, her father, and her husband in November 2007.
The case was based on a complaint by the man’s first wife, who stated that she married him in March 1990 and had three daughters with him. She alleged that her husband mistreated her and forced her to leave their home in July 2005. Three months later, she discovered that he had remarried while still legally married to her.
Following the first wife’s complaint, the magistrate initiated legal proceedings against the husband for bigamy under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and against the second wife and her father for abetment under Section 109 of the IPC.
High Court Dismisses Case Against Second Wife and Her Father
Challenging the magistrate’s order, the second wife and her father approached the High Court. The prosecution argued that the second wife was guilty of abetting bigamy simply because she married the man despite his existing marriage.
However, Justice Makarand Karnik ruled that there was no substantial evidence to prove that the second wife and her father actively assisted or encouraged the act of bigamy. The judge observed that the complaint lacked any material that could establish their involvement in the crime.
The court emphasized that while the case against the husband, the main offender, could proceed, there was no indication of how the second wife or her father had aided or instigated him.
“There is absolutely no mention in the complaint about how the second wife and her father abetted the crime. Simply performing a second marriage is not enough to prosecute them for abetment,” Justice Karnik stated in the verdict.
This ruling sets a significant precedent in cases related to bigamy, reinforcing that prosecution for abetment requires clear evidence of active involvement, not just the act of marriage itself.
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==
