A short collection of Bigamy Judgments u/s 494 IPC/495 IPC.
- Priya Bala Ghosh Vs Suresh Chandra Ghosh on 4 Mar 1971 [SC: Acceptable proof necessary that the (alleged second) marriage of the accused was celebrated or performed with proper ceremonies as prescribed u/s 7 of HMA, such as Saptapadi and Homam]
- Santi Deb Berma Vs Kanchan Prava Devi on 10 Oct 1990 [SC: Acceptable proof necessary that the (alleged second) marriage of the accused was celebrated or performed with proper ceremonies as prescribed u/s 7 of HMA, such as Saptapadi and Homam]
- Dwarika Prasad Satpathy Vs Bidyut Prava Dixit and Anr on 14 Oct 1999 [SC: The standard of proof of marriage in such proceeding is not as strict as is required in a trial of offence under section 494 of the I.P.C.]
- S Nagalingam Vs Sivagami on 31 August 2001 [SC: Unless a valid marriage is proved, a second marriage stands invalid and no offence under section 494 IPC attracts]
- K Neelaveni Vs State Rep By Inspector of Police and Ors on 22 Mar 2010 [SC: Clear ingredients of IPC 406 and 494; HC should NOT have quashed the FIR]
- A.Subash Babu Vs State of A.P. and Anr on 21 July, 2011 [SC: Due to State amendment, IPC 494 and IPC 495 are Cognizable and Non-bailable Offences in AP (and Telangana); APHC passed a partially perverse judgment here that go against this judgment so they are NOT to be relied up on.]
- Kannan Vs Selvamuthukani on 30 Jan 2012 [SC: It has to be clearly established that the family members of Accused-husband knew that his divorce with his first wife was set aside before participating in the second marriage]
- Ushaben Vs Kishorbhai Chunilal Talpada & Ors on 23 March, 2012 [SC: If a complaint contains allegations about commission of offence under Section 498A of the IPC which is a cognizable offence, apart from allegations about the commission of a non-cognizable offence under Section 494 of the IPC, the court can take cognizance thereof even on a police report.]
- Miriyala Divya and 5 Others Vs Govt of AP on 19 September, 2014 [APHC: Magistrate can take cognizance of Sec 494 IPC complaint despite it having a rider u/s 198 CrPC. Explained]
- Saraswathi Vs Thirupathi and Anr on 24 Sep 2014 [MHC: Due to State amendment, as per Section 7A of HMA, tying thali, exchanging garlands are sufficient enough proof to attract IPC 494 and IPC 495 in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry]
- B.Parvathi Vs State of AP on 7 May, 2020 [APHC: on maintainability of IPC 494 upon the Accused No.2 and the merits of discharge petition filed before Trial Court u/s 227 CrPC but Partly perverse as it goes against A.Subash Babu Vs State of A.P. and Anr on 21 July, 2011 hence NOT to be relied up on.]
- Asha Devi and Anr Vs State of UP and 2 Ors on 1 Dec 2020 [AllHC: No protection for Bigamers]
- Harpreet Kaur and Anr Vs State of Punjab and Ors on 01 Nov 2021 [PHHC: No protection for Bigamers]
- K Jagga Rao Vs State of AP and Anr on 14 Aug 2023 [APHC: Referred to the partially perverse judgment here but held that a Magistrate can take cognizance of a charge sheet for an offence of 494 IPC due to the State amendment as per A.Subash Babu Vs State of A.P. and Anr on 21 July, 2011]
- Baba Natarajan Prasad Vs M. Revathi on 15 Jul 2024 [SC: 6 months punishment for Bigamers]
- Deep Dey Vs State of West Bengal and Anr on 6 Mar 2026 [CALHC : Marriage executed on stamp paper has no legal validity and cannot sustain bigamy or cruelty charges under IPC.]
MASTER Index is here.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) – Bigamy Law in India (Sections 494 & 495 IPC)
Bigamy occurs when a person contracts a second marriage while the first marriage is still legally subsisting and the spouse is alive. Under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), such a marriage is void and punishable if the first marriage has not been dissolved by divorce or annulment.
A person convicted of bigamy under Section 494 IPC can face imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine. The offence is generally non-cognizable and bailable, and it is usually tried by a Magistrate of the First Class.
Section 495 IPC deals with a more serious form of bigamy. It applies when a person conceals the fact of their existing marriage from the person they are marrying again. In such cases, the punishment can extend to ten years of imprisonment and a fine.
To establish the offence of bigamy, courts generally require proof of the following elements:
- Existence of a valid first marriage
- The first spouse is alive and the marriage is still subsisting
- A second marriage has been solemnized
- The second marriage is void because the first marriage continues
No. The validity of marriage does not depend solely on registration. Courts examine whether the marriage was solemnized according to valid customs or ceremonies. Even an unregistered marriage may still be considered valid for the purpose of proving bigamy.
Under Section 198 CrPC, complaints for offences relating to marriage can generally be filed only by the aggrieved spouse. In certain circumstances, close relatives of the spouse may also file a complaint with the permission of the court.
Judicial decisions have clarified that the offence of bigamy primarily applies to the spouse who contracts the second marriage. Family members or relatives cannot ordinarily be prosecuted unless their independent criminal involvement is specifically established.
Yes. Courts have repeatedly emphasized that bigamy is a serious offence affecting the institution of marriage, as it undermines marital stability and may cause injustice to the first spouse.
Courts require clear proof that the second marriage was actually performed according to valid ceremonies or customs. Mere cohabitation or relationship is not sufficient to establish the offence of bigamy unless the essential marriage ceremonies are proved.
Bigamy offences under Section 494 IPC are generally compoundable with the permission of the court by the spouse of the accused. Courts may allow settlement depending on the facts and circumstances of the case.
While personal laws regulate marriage, the Indian Penal Code is a general criminal law. If the legal ingredients of Section 494 IPC are satisfied, prosecution for bigamy may be initiated irrespective of community, subject to applicable personal law exceptions.
