The case established the legal principle that the concealment of a former marriage and the subsequent marriage during the subsistence of the former marriage can lead to conviction under Section 495 IPC.

This criminal revision, under Section 397 read with Section 402 Cr PC, is directed against the concurrent finding of the courts below that the revisionist, having a living wife, married again with another woman, concealing the fact of former marriage from the woman with whom he contracted the subsequent marriage. He was, accordingly, convicted for the offence under Section 495 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years. The judgment and order of court below was upheld in appeal preferred by the revisionist.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 9.6.1888, Ms. Savita filed a Complaint No. 1307/1990 before Judicial Magistrate II, Dehradun, wherein, inter alia, it was averred that she and Babu Ram Saini, both were working in same private company at Dehradun. Relationship between the two became very close. Babu Ram Saini proposed to marry her stating that he was a divorcee. Believing the version of Babu Ram Saini, she agreed to marry him. On 1.9.1981, their marriage was solemnized as per Hindu rituals and ceremonies. Subsequently, she came to know that, in fact, Babu Ram Saini was not a divorcee, and he was already having a living wife namely Smt. Vijay Saini, from whose wedlock a son was born on 13.5.1981, and they were still living together as husband and wife along with their three children. So, Ms. Savita filed the said complaint alleging that the revisionist Babu Ram Saini was a bigamous spouse as his second marriage with her had taken place during the subsistence of the revisionist's first marriage with Smt. Vijay Saini.

3. In support of her averments, she produced oral and documentary evidence before the Trial Magistrate. In the oral evidence, she examined Ved Prakash and Ramesh Kumar, while in the documentary evidence, she produced photographs of her marriage along with negatives thereof, copy of gift deed wherein Smt. Vijay Saini has been shown to be wife of Babu Ram Saini even after solemnization of his second marriage with Ms. Savita, and the revisionist himself is a witness to the said gift deed executed on 30.10.1984, voter list of Smt. Vijay Saini wherein she has been shown to be wife of revisionist even after 1.9.1981, date of birth certificate of the child who born on 13.5.1981 out of the wedlock of Babu Ram Saini and Smt. Vijay Saini. Ms. Savita also produced some other documents in addition to these. To rebut, accused revisionist also adduced his evidence.

4. After appreciating the entire evidence as well as the arguments advanced by both the parties, learned Judicial Magistrate II, Dehradun vide his judgment and order dated 12.6.1995 held that the subsequent marriage of the accused revisionist with the complainant Ms. Savita was established. Accused revisionist was, accordingly, convicted for the offence under Section 495 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. However, he was exonerated from the offence under Section 420 IPC.

5. In appeal preferred by the accused revisionist, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun vide his judgment and order dated 10.10.2003, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 49/1995, affirmed the finding and order of the Trial Magistrate holding that both the marriages of accused revisionist are established, but divorce of first marriage is not proved.

6. Being aggrieved, accused convict Babu Ram Saini has preferred the instant revision.

7. I have given patient hearing to the accused revisionist, who has argued in person before this Court, and also the learned counsel for the private respondent. Also perused the materials available on record.

8. Accused revisionist has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 495 IPC. Ms. Savita has adduced enough evidence to prove that the accused revisionist had concealed the fact of the former marriage by assuring her that he had taken divorce from his first wife and subsequently married Ms. Savita by performing the essential Hindu rites and ceremonies in accordance with Secti