{"id":347980,"date":"2025-05-16T09:00:26","date_gmt":"2025-05-16T03:30:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=347980"},"modified":"2025-06-02T15:40:06","modified_gmt":"2025-06-02T10:10:06","slug":"bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Allahabad High Court:<\/span> In an application filed to quash the chargesheet and summoning orders passed against the accused for the offences under Sections 376<\/a>, 495<\/a>, 120-B<\/a>, 504<\/a>, 506<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (\u2018IPC\u2019) pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, the Single Judge Bench of Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, J. held that if a Muslim male had performed his first marriage in accordance with Mohammedan law, then his second, third, or fourth marriage would not have been considered void. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 494<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> would not have been attracted to the second marriage, except in cases where the second marriage had been declared batil (void) by the Family Court under Section 7<\/a> of the Family Court Act<\/a> or by any competent court, as per the Shariat.<\/p>\n

The issue in the present case was whether a Muslim male, who contracts a second marriage during the lifetime of his spouse, would be liable for bigamy under Section 494<\/a> IPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that for Section 494<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> to have applied, it was essential that the first spouse was alive at the time of the second marriage and that the second marriage was legally void. The Court also highlighted that even if a second marriage had been contracted during the lifetime of a spouse, the ingredients of Section 494 would not have been attracted unless the second marriage was legally void.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that, as per Section 2 of the Shariat Act, the validity of a marriage between two Muslims (male and female) is to be determined in accordance with Muslim Personal Law (Shariat). Under Muslim law, marriage (nikah) is regarded as a civil contract entered by two individuals of the opposite sex for the purposes of mutual enjoyment and the legitimization of offspring. The Islamic concept of marriage stands in contrast to the Hindu view, where marriage is considered a sacred sacrament (samskara) rather than a mere civil contract. The Court further noted that the purpose of marriage in Islam extends beyond procreation to include companionship and mutual satisfaction.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the concept of Muslim law was founded on the principles of Shariat. As traditionally interpreted and applied in India, Muslim law permits a man to contract more than one marriage during the subsistence of an existing one, provided that he is capable of doing justice between co-wives, a condition precedent under the law. The Court emphasised that even under Muslim law, the right to enter multiple marriages was not an unconditional privilege conferred upon the husband.<\/p>\n

The Court further highlighted that the Quran permits polygamy for just and fair reasons, but in modern times, this provision is often misused for selfish purposes. Notably, polygamy is mentioned in the Quran only once, and even then, it is subject to strict conditions. The historical context behind this allowance was significant: during a period of early Islamic history, many women were widowed and children orphaned due to tribal conflicts and battles, particularly those that occurred while defending the nascent Islamic community in Medina. It was in these exceptional circumstances that the Quran permitted conditional polygamy as a means to protect orphans and their mothers from exploitation. The Quran first directs men to care for orphans and only suggests marriage to widowed mothers if the men believe they cannot fairly safeguard the orphans\u2019 interests while remaining uninvolved. Even then, permission is conditional, any such marriage must be carried out with the assurance of equal and just treatment of all wives and their families.<\/p>\n

The Court concluded that a second marriage during the lifetime of a spouse was permissible under Mohammedan Law, but only subject to certain conditions. Therefore, if a Muslim man had contracted a second marriage in accordance with Muslim Personal Law while his first wife was still living and provided that the first marriage had also been validly contracted under Muslim Law, the second marriage would have been considered legally valid. However, the Court noted that such a second marriage could still have been declared batil (void) under Mohammedan Law if it had violated essential conditions. Unless and until such a declaration had been made, the second marriage between two Muslims (male and female) was to be deemed valid.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that although Muslim law did not prohibit a Muslim male from contracting a second marriage during the lifetime of his first wife, it strictly prohibited a Muslim woman from marrying again during the lifetime of her husband. Such a marriage by a woman was considered batil (void) under Mohammedan law, and she would be liable to prosecution under Section 494<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court highlighted that a second marriage contracted by a Muslim male is valid under Shariat law. However, in certain circumstances, such a marriage may be considered batil (void), particularly where it is performed within the prohibited degrees of relationship as defined under Muslim personal law. The Court raised an important question, who has the authority to declare a second marriage batil under Mohammedan law?<\/p>\n

The Court explained that Section 2 of the Shariat Act provides that all questions regarding marriage must be decided in accordance with the Shariat. Section 3 of the same Act allows such matters to be determined by a \u2018prescribed authority.\u2019 However, the Court noted that the State has not notified any such authority under Section 4 of the Shariat Act. In the absence of a specifically prescribed authority, such questions were traditionally resolved by maulvis or religious scholars. However, with the enactment of the Family Courts Act, 1984<\/a>, any question relating to the validity of a marriage, including those governed by Muslim personal law, can now be decided by the Family Court. This is by virtue of Explanation (a) and (b) to Section 7<\/a> of the Family Courts Act<\/a>, which grants jurisdiction to adjudicate matters concerning marriage, regardless of the religion of the parties involved.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court concluded that under Mohammedan law, a Muslim male did not have an unfettered right to contract a second marriage unless he had the capacity to treat all wives equally. In view of the above analysis and discussion, the Court held as follows:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. If a Muslim male had performed his first marriage in accordance with Mohammedan law, then his second, third, or fourth marriage would not have been considered void. Therefore, the ingredients of Section 494<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> would not have been attracted to the second marriage, except in cases where the second marriage had been declared batil (void) by the Family Court under Section 7<\/a> of the Family Court Act<\/a> or by any competent court, as per the Shariat.<\/li>\n
  2. If the first marriage of a person had been performed under the Special Marriage Act, 1954<\/a>, the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969<\/a>, the Christian Marriage Act, 1872<\/a>, the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936<\/a>, or the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955<\/a>, and the individual later performed a second marriage under Mohammedan law after converting to Islam, the second marriage would have been void. In such a case, an offence under Section 494<\/a> of the IPC<\/a> would have been attracted.<\/li>\n
  3. \n

    The Family Court also had jurisdiction under Section 7<\/a> of the Family Courts Act<\/a> to decide the validity of a Muslim marriage performed in accordance with Muslim Personal Law.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The Court further observed that Article 25<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a> guaranteed religious freedom, including the right to profess, practice, and propagate one\u2019s religion. However, this right was subject to public order, morality, health, and the other provisions of Part III of the Constitution. Therefore, religious liberty under Article 25 was not absolute and could have been regulated by the State.<\/p>\n

    The Court stated that although the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937<\/a> declared that issues among Muslims, as mentioned in Section 2 of the Act, should be decided according to Muslim Personal Law, Parliament had enacted the following laws in the exercise of its regulatory power for the welfare of Muslim women:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939<\/a><\/li>\n
    2. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986<\/a><\/li>\n
    3. \n

      The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019<\/a><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Upon reviewing several provisions of Muslim law, the Court observed that Islam permits more than one marriage only under certain circumstances and conditions. However, this permission was often misused, even in contradiction to the mandates of Muslim law as outlined in the Quranic verses referenced above. Consequently, the Court concurred with the suggestions made in Sarla Mudgal<\/span> v. Union of India<\/span>, (1995) 3 SCC 635<\/a>, Lily Thomas v Union of India<\/span>, (2000) 6 SCC 224<\/a>, and Jafar Abbas Rasoolmohammad Merchant<\/span> v. State of Gujarat<\/span>, 2015 SCC OnLine Guj 5552<\/a>, regarding the enactment of a Uniform Civil Code in accordance with the mandate of Article 44<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>. The Court emphasized that this issue needs to be considered by the legislature.<\/p>\n

      Coming back to the controversy at hand, the Court held that from the perusal of the statement of wife it was clear that she had admitted that the husband had contracted a second marriage with her, and both parties were Muslims. Therefore, the second marriage was deemed valid. As a result, the offences under Section 376<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>, as well as Section 495<\/a> read with Section 120-B<\/a> of the IPC<\/a>, were not made out against the accused husband.<\/p>\n

      Noting that the matter required further consideration, the Court issued a notice to the wife returnable at an early date and directed the case to be listed on 26-05-2025.<\/p>\n

      [Furkan v. State of UP, 2025 SCC OnLine All 2954<\/a>, decided on 08-05-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

      \n

      Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

      Counsel for Applicant:<\/span>– Alok Kumar Pandey,Prashant Kumar,Susheel Kumar Pandey<\/p>\n

      Counsel for Opposite Party:<\/span>– G.A<\/p>\n

      Buy Penal Code, 1860 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

      \"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

      Allahabad High Court highlighted that the Quran permits polygamy for just and fair reasons, but in modern times, this provision is often misused for selfish purposes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":314936,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2822,82106,3594,82108,44503,43499,82107],"class_list":["post-347980","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Allahabad_High_Court","tag-batil-marriage","tag-bigamy","tag-bigamy-under-mohammedan-law","tag-mohammedan-law","tag-muslim-marriage","tag-shariat-law"],"yoast_head":"\nBigamy Not Applicable to Muslim Man Under Mohammedan Law Unless Second Marriage is Batil: Allahabad HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-05-16T03:30:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-06-02T10:10:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/\",\"name\":\"Bigamy Not Applicable to Muslim Man Under Mohammedan Law Unless Second Marriage is Batil: Allahabad HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-05-16T03:30:26+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-06-02T10:10:06+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Allahabad High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bigamy Not Applicable to Muslim Man Under Mohammedan Law Unless Second Marriage is Batil: Allahabad HC | SCC Times","description":"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court","og_description":"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-05-16T03:30:26+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-06-02T10:10:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/","name":"Bigamy Not Applicable to Muslim Man Under Mohammedan Law Unless Second Marriage is Batil: Allahabad HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-05-16T03:30:26+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-02T10:10:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Allahabad High Court ruled that a Muslim man is not liable for bigamy if his marriages are conducted under Mohammedan Law, except when the second marriage is declared batil as per Shariat.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Allahabad High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/16\/bigamy-not-applicable-muslim-man-mohammedan-law-allahabad-hc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bigamy not applicable to Muslim man under Mohammedan Law unless second marriage is void under Shariat: Allahabad High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":275545,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/13\/allahabad-high-court-family-courts-act-1984-rocr-article-21-of-the-constitution-fundamental-rights-muslim-law-bigamy-dignity-legal-research-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":0},"title":"Allahabad High Court | Muslim wife cannot be compelled by Court to live with her husband against her wishes while second marriage of the husband subsists","author":"Editor","date":"October 13, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Allahabad High Court: In an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for setting aside the judgment dated 04.08.2022 and the decree dated 12.08.2022 by the Family Court, whereby the appellant's suit for restoration of conjugal rights, has been dismissed, the division bench of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Allahabad High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":328772,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/16\/oral-gift-deed-mohammedan-law-reduced-writing-unregistred-document-not-subjected-proceedings-under-section-47-a-stamp-act-allahabad-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":1},"title":"Can oral gift deed under Mohammedan Law reduced in writing on unregistered document be subjected to S. 47-A of Stamp Act? Allahabad HC answers","author":"Apoorva","date":"August 16, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The proceedings under S. 33 of Stamp Act will be initiated and not under S. 47-A if gift deed requires for payment of stamp duty.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Allahabad High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240448,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/10\/flashback-can-polygamy-be-an-integral-part-of-any-religion-read-allahabad-hcs-decision-on-finding-a-government-servant-being-guilty-of-bigamy\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":2},"title":"[Flashback] Can Polygamy be an integral part of any religion? Read Allahabad HC’s decision on finding a Government Servant being guilty of ‘Bigamy’","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 10, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court:\u00a0Sudhir Agarwal, J., found a government servant to be guilty of the offence of bigamy. The instant petition was filed against the decision passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra dismissing the petitioner from the post of Fireman and therefore mandamus was sought to direct respondent not\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/image-29.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/image-29.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/image-29.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/image-29.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/image-29.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240774,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/16\/gau-hc-if-a-marriage-is-first-solemnised-under-the-special-marriage-act-and-later-upon-conversion-to-islam-marriage-is-again-solemnised-under-mohammedan-law-which-law-will-prevail-for-dissolution\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":3},"title":"Gau HC | If a marriage is first solemnised under the Special Marriage Act and later upon conversion to Islam, marriage is again solemnised under Mohammedan Law: Which law will prevail for dissolution of marriage? Court to consider","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 16, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Gauhati High Court:\u00a0Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J., addressed a matter wherein a marriage took place under the Special Marriage Act, but the wife converted to Islamic Religion during the sustenance of marriage, in light of the said premise under which Act for the purpose of divorce parties would be governed.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6699,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/03\/03\/punishment-under-section-494-ipc-for-bigamy-is-applicable-on-all-citizens-whether-they-are-hindu-muslim-christian\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":4},"title":"Punishment under Section 494 IPC for bigamy is applicable on all citizens whether they are Hindu\/ Muslim\/Christian","author":"Sucheta","date":"March 3, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: On a petition filed by a public spirited person before this Court challenging that the provisions of Section 494 IPC are discriminatory on the ground of religion, a division bench of Ashok Bhushan and A.M. Shaffique JJ held that Section 494 IPC does not discriminate between Hindu\/\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":321523,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/06\/allahabad-high-court-quashes-criminal-proceeding-against-wife-accused-bigamy\/","url_meta":{"origin":347980,"position":5},"title":"Allahabad High Court quashes criminal proceeding against wife accused of Bigamy due to lack of ingredients to constitute S. 494 IPC offence","author":"Apoorva","date":"May 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Court set aside the impugned summoning order and the criminal proceedings against the wife under Section 494 IPC. However, the Court did not quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the wife under Sections 504, 506 IPC.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Allahabad High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Allahabad-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347980","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=347980"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347980\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314936"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=347980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=347980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=347980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}