24 Ene Suresh Chandra Ghosh [1971 1 SCC 864 = Heavens 1971 Sc 1153 = 1971 step 3 SCR 961]
“Area 17 will bring you to any matrimony anywhere between several Hindus solemnised immediately following the start of the Act is emptiness if the at time of such relationships either team got a husband or wife way of living, which the brand new arrangements away from areas 494 and you can 495 ipc should use properly. The marriage ranging from a few Hindus try emptiness in view of Area 17 in the event the one or two requirements was found: (i) the wedding are solemnised following the commencement of your own Work; (ii) on day of such wedding, sometimes team got a spouse life. In case the labai inside the March 1962 can not be supposed to be ‘solemnised', you to marriage will never be emptiness by the virtue out-of Area 17 of the Operate and Area 494 IPC cannot affect eg people for the matrimony while the got a spouse living.”
In Rakeya Bibi v
28. Which v. [Sky 1966 Sc 614 = 1966 1 SCR 539] The issue are once more noticed when you look at the Priya Bala Ghosh v. Into the Gopal Lal v. County Out of Rajasthan [1979 dos SCC 170 = Heavens 1979 South carolina 713 = 1979 2 SCR 1171] Murtaza Fazal Ali, J., talking with the Legal, seen since below: (SCC p. 173, con el fin de 5)
“[W]here a spouse contracts the second marriage as basic marriage is still subsisting the latest spouse would-be accountable for bigamy not as much as Section 494 if it's turned-out your second matrimony is a legitimate one out of the sense that required ceremonies called for by law otherwise of the individualized was indeed in fact performed.