An admission of a second marriage by the accused in an affidavit is insufficient to secure a conviction for bigamy under Section 494 of the IPC, as the law requires strict proof of the performance of the essential marriage ceremonies.

THIS CRL.A FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC (FILED U/S 419(4) BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC SAGAR, IN C.C.NO.124/2019 DATED 07.02.2025 ACQUITTING THE RESPONDENTS FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 494 OF IPC, AND BE PLEASED TO CONVICT THE RESPONDENTS.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the complainant being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 07.02.2025 passed in CC.No.124/2019 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Sagar, by which complaint filed by the appellant herein under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. seeking an order to take cognizance of the offence allegedly committed by the respondents herein under Section 494 of IPC by which the accused/respondent herein has been acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC.

2. The case of the complainant/appellant is that her marriage with accused No.1 was solemnized 24 years prior to filing of the complaint in terms of Hindu rites and rituals. After sometime, accused No.1 started to ill-treat the complainant/appellant herein constraining her to reside with her children separately. Accused No.1 illegally married accused No.2 and they have been living together as husband and wife and have begotten three children out of the said marriage. The second marriage of accused No.1 with accused No.2 is during the subsistence of the first marriage and is therefore invalid. Accused is guilty of offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC. Hence, a complaint was filed.

3. Records reveal that pre-charge trial was conducted. Charges were framed since the accused pleaded not guilty, matter was set down for trial.

4. Complainant examined herself as PW1 and exhibited 11 documents marked at Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. No evidence is recorded on behalf of the accused, except confronting a document Ex.D1 a Partition Deed. The trial Court on appreciation of the evidence, passed the impugned order acquitting the accused of the alleged offence under Section 494 of IPC.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submits that there is a categorical admission by accused No.1 of he marrying accused No.2 and having 3 children. He draws the attention of the Court to the affidavit dated 20.07.2019 marked as Ex.P3 which is filed by accused No.1 in the proceedings initiated by the complainant/appellant under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act in C.Misc.No.94/2014. Referring to unnumbered para 2 of the said affidavit, learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is an admission by accused No.1 acknowledging accused No.2 to be his wife and he having 3 children out of the said marriage, is sufficient enough to convict and sentence the accused person to undergo the imprisonment as contemplated under Section 494 of IPC. He submits that the trial Court has erred in not taking the said piece of evidence into consideration by erroneously relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kanwal Ram and Others vs Himachal Pradesh Administration , reported in AIR 1966 SC 614. Thus, he submits when there is an admission by the accused himself, there was no requirement of complainant appellant to discharge any burden in this regard. Hence, seeks for allowing the appeal.

6. Heard. Perused the records.

7. The marriage between the complainant/ appellant and accused No.1 is not in dispute. Allegation in the complaint is that accused No.1 has contracted marriage with accused No.2 during the subsistence of the marriage with the