Back
2000 Supreme(MP) 587
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (JABALPUR)
S.P. Khare, J.
Gopal Singh
Vs.
Surajbhain Singh and others
Criminal Appeal No. 1075/90
Decided On: 11.07.2000
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Shri A.K. Pathak, Adv.
For Respondents/Defendant: Shri Umesh Trivedi, Adv.
The main legal point established is the requirement to prove a second marriage was solemnized according to customary rites and ceremonies in a bigamy case, emphasizing a pragmatic approach in evaluating evidence and the relevance of supporting circumstances such as the birth of a child.
Headnote:
Bigamy - Criminal Appeal - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 378(4), 494, 494/114, IPC - Customary Rites and Ceremonies - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 7(1), 7(2), 17 - Evidence Act - Section 50 - Second Marriage Proved - Essential Rites and Ceremonies - Court's Pragmatic Approach - Conviction and Sentencing
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an appeal against the acquittal of the respondents under Sections 494 and 494/114, IPC, where the complainant challenged the second marriage of the accused under customary rites and ceremonies.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the second marriage between the accused and Chitralekha was proved to have been performed in accordance with essential rites and ceremonies, leading to the conviction of the accused under Section 494, IPC, and the abetment of the offense by other family members.
Issues: (a) Whether accused Surajbhan Singh had re-married Chitralekha according to customary rites and ceremonies observed by Hindus; and (b) Whether accused Guljar Singh, Pratap Singh, and Yeshodabai abetted the commission of this crime.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to prove the alleged second marriage was solemnized according to customary rites and ceremonies, and adopted a pragmatic approach in evaluating the evidence. It also highlighted the relevance of the birth of a child through the second marriage as a strong supporting circumstance.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the acquittal was set aside, and the accused were convicted under relevant sections. The court imposed sentences and directed the payment of compensation to the first wife.
S.P. Khare, J.
1. This is an appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the complainant challenging the order of acquittal of the respondents under Sections 494 and 494/114, IPC. Special leave to appeal was granted to the complainant by order dated 8-11-1990. Respondent No. 3 Dham Singh has died during the pendency of this appeal. Therefore, it has abated against him.
2. It is not disputed that Savita (P.W. 3) was married to accused No. 1 Surajbhan Singh on 18-2-1982. This marriage was solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies. There was saptapadi before the sacred fire. Savita (P.W. 3) gave birth to a female child. Accused No, 2 Guljar Singh is father of Surajbhan Singh.
3. The prosecution case is that accused Surajbhan Singh re-married Chitralekha on 19-5-1983 in village Sarangarh. According to the complainant this marriage was also solemnized in the form of Saptapadi before the sacred fire. Chitralekha is daughter of accused Nos. 4 and 5 Pratap Singh and Yashodabai. They were apprised of the fact of the existing marriage between Savita (P.W. 3) and Surajbhan Singh but they married Chitralekha to him.
4. The accused persons pleaded not guilty. Their defence is that accused Surajbhan Singh has not married Chitralekha according to essential rites and ceremonies.
5. The Trial Magistrate held that the second marriage has not been proved as required by law and acquitted all the accused persons.
6. In this appeal it has been argued on behalf of the appellant that there is sufficient evidence on record which proves beyond reasonable doubt the performance of the second marriage. On the other hand, it is contended that the complainant has failed to prove the second marriage according to the standard of proof required in a criminal case.
7. The points of determination are (a) Whether accused Surajbhan Singh has re-married Chitralekha according to the customary rites and ceremonies observed by Hindus; and (b) Whether accused Guljar Singh, Pratap Singh and Yeshoda have abetted the commission of this crime.
8. Points (a) and (b):
Gopal Singh (P.W. 1) is uncle of Savita (P.W. 3). He has deposed that Surajbhan Singh has remarried Chitralekha. He came to know that this marriage was about to be performed by the letter dated 12-5-1983 (Ex. P-3) which was written to Gajanan Singh Thakur of Champa by accused Dham Singh, grand father of Chitralekha. He hastened to Sarangarh to dissuade the parents of Chitralekha to perform this bigamous marriage. He took Jagannath (P.W. 2) also with him who was Sarpanch of his village. He has further deposed that he saw Mandap in the house of accused Pratap Singh. He informed Pratap Singh that there is already a subsisting marriage between Savita (P.W. 3) and Surajbhan Singh and therefore, he should not marry his daughter to him. But he did not listen. Barat Party came in the night and there was marriage between Surajbhan Singh and Chitralekha in the form of Saptapadi before the sacred fire. He stayed in Sarangarh in the night and came back next day. He has further deposed that Surajbhan Singh is living with Chitralekha and they have a son through this second marriage.
9. Jagannath (P.W. 2) has fully corroborated the testimony of Gopal Singh (P.W. 1). He has stated on oath that the marriage between Surajbhan Singh and Chitralekha took place in his presence. There was saptapadi before the sacred fire. He has further stated that he asked accused Pratap Singh and Yeshodabai that they should not marry their daughter to Surajbhan Singh as he is already married to Savita. But they did not agree. Savita (P.W. 3) has deposed that Surajbhan Singh has a son through Chitralekha and she was again pregnant at the time of her evidence. Bisahu Singh (P.W. 4) has also supported the evidence of the complainant. According to him there was second marriage of Surajbhan Singh in his presence. He has further deposed that Surajbhan Singh is keeping Chitralekha as his wife and they have
