Md farhad meazi

1. Bigamy
Md.Farhad Meazi
Department of Criminology
2nd
year, 1st semester
University Of Dhaka
Definition: The act of going through marriage ceremony while already
married to another person. The offences of marrying someone while already
married to another person. Bigamy has a condition of having two wives or two
husbands atthe same time. In cultures that practice marital monogamy, bigamy is
the act of entering into a marriage with one person while s till legally married
to another. Bigamy is a crime in most western countries, and when it occurs in
this context often neither the first nor second spouse is aware of the other.
Our Penal code defines the offence of bigamy in section 494:
“Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such
marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or
wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine”

2. Features of Bigamy: Bigamy occurs when a married man marries
another womanwithout legally divorcing his first wife. Bigamists are not
necessarily men and there are many examples of women who have
committed the crime of bigamy by marrying several men
simultaneously. In most cases the spouse may not be aware of the
existence of another marriage. In some cultures bigamy may take place
with the approval of both wives. A trigamy is committed if the said
person acquires a third wife. Sometimes bigamy happens by accident
when the partners are staying apart and one of them remarries. If the
separation is for more than five years, the partner who remarries be
absolved of bigamy charges.
Islam & Polygamy: Under Islamic marital jurisprudence, Muslim men are
allowed to practice polygyny, that is, they can have more than one wife at the
same time, up to a total of four. Polyandry, the practice of a woman having more
than one husband, by contrast, is not permitted.
Polygyny for Muslims, in practice and in law, differs greatly throughoutthe Islamic
world, where polygynous marriages constitute 41–53% of all marriages. In some
Muslim countries, polygyny is relatively common, while in others, it is rare or non-
existent. Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Tunisia and Turkey, for example,
are predominantly Muslim countries that havenot adopted Islamic law for marital
regulations, where polygon is not legal. Islam is criticized for allowing polygamy,
for popular culture in the West views polygamy as relatively backward and
impoverished. For many Christians, it is a license to promiscuity, and feminists
consider it a violation of women’s rights and demeaning to women. A crucial
point that needs to be understood is that for Muslims, standards of morality are
not set by prevalent Western thought, but by divine revelation. A few simple
facts should be borne in mind before any talk of polygamy in Islam.
.
Section 6 (5) MFLO 1961: This section states that any man who contracts
another marriage without the permission of the Arbitration Council shall:

3. A. Immediately pay the amount of the dower due to the existing wife; and
B. On conviction upon any complaint be punishable with simple imprisonment of
up to one year, or with fine, or both.
Muslim Women?
Prosecution against a Muslim Woman who undertakes bigamy, will, however,
stand.
Section 494 also applies to men and women of the Christian and Buddhist faith
since their religions only sanction monogamous marriages.
But Polygamy under Muslim Law???
Framing of charges under section 494 against a Muslim man who marries for the
second time during the lifetime of his first wife and while they are still married,
cannot be done.
Under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, the second marriage is a valid
marriage, since polygamy is still recognized (with certain conditions).
Under such circumstances, the charge has to be framed under section 6 (5) of the
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961.
Criticism in Islamic polygamy: In Islamic martial system islam permit
the polygamy, but it is not to right the man and woman equally. A man can four
marriages in his whole life and keep all of the wives at the same time but the
same right has not given to women because a women keep only one husband at
time. Islam gives the right to four marriages a man if he has ability to maintain
them in financially. Some people abuse it and they continuously marriage and
cheat with them. Even if people haven’t capability of doing this they do this lust
for captured property or meet the sexual gratification. So women are very easily
cheated by them.The sariah council do not observe the fact carefully that’s why
the actual offender save themselves very easily. Sometimes they hide their first
conceal their first marriage .

4. Points to be proved by the prosecutions on a charge
of bigamy:
12.The second marriage isvoid by reason of the subsistence of the first according
to personallaw,if any of the person contracting the second marriage.
3.Absence of either of the exceptionsmentioned avobe.. Existence of the first wife
or husband when the second marriage is celebrated.
In prosecution for bigamy, the second must be proved a marriage is not proved
unless the essential ceremonies for this solemnization are proved to have been
performed.
Defense : an accused person in order escape a conviction on a charge
of bigamy ,many prove any to conviction on a charge of bigamy , may
prove any of the following facts:
The former marriage has been declared void by a court competent jurisdiction
;or(2)the former husbandor wife has beenat the time the subsequent marriage,
a continually absent from him or her absent 7 years at least,and has not been
heard of him or her for 7 years,at least there and has not been heard of him or
her as being alive within that time and real state of facts, so far person with
whom the subsequent marriage is contracted.
Bigamy in Bangladesh penal code: The Chapter on Offences relating
to Marriage under the Bangladesh Penal Code of 1860 contains two provisions
relating to bigamy – the first of these applicable to married persons marrying
again without concealing from the second spouse the fact of the first marriage,
and the second to those who do so by keeping the second spouse in the dark
about the first marriage. Section 494 of the Code reads as:- “Whoever having a
husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by
reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be

5. punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
seven years, and shall also be liable to fine
Exception: This section does not extend to any person whose marriage with
such husband or wife has been declared void by a court of competent
jurisdiction, nor to any person who contracts a marriage during the life of a
former husband or wife, if such husband or wife, at the time of the subsequent
marriage, shall have been continually absent from such person for the space of
seven years, and shall not have been heard of by such person as being alive
within that time, provided the person contracting such subsequent marriage
shall, before such marriage takes place, inform the person with whom such
marriage is contracted of the real state of facts so far as the same are within
his or her knowledge.” Comingto the cases of bigamy where a person indulges
in it by deceiving the second spouse, Section 495 of the Bangladeshi Penal
Code says:- “Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding
section having concealed from the person with whom the subsequent
marriage is contracted, the fact of the former marriages hall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
ten years, and shall also be liable to fine”. It will be seen that application of
these provisions of the Bangladesh Penal Code would be attracted only if the
second marriage is void, for the reason of being bigamous, under the law
otherwise applicable to the parties to a particular case; but not so otherwise.
As such the anti-bigamy provisions of the Bangladesh Penal Code apply to all
those whose marriages are governed by any of the following legislative
enactments all of which regard a second bigamous marriage, by a man or
woman, as void:
(1)Special marriage act 1872
As regards the Muslims, the Bangladesh provisions relating to bigamy apply to
women – since Muslim law treats a second bigamous marriage by a married
woman as void – but not to men as under a general reading of the traditional

6. Muslim law men are supposed to be free to contract plural marriages. The
veracity of this belief, of course, needs a careful scrutiny.
Other marital law in Bangladesh:
 Special marital act,1872: The Special Marriage Act, 1872, was
enacted to provide a form of marriage for persons who do not profess the
Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Parsi, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina religions and
for persons who profess Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina religions and to
legalize certain marriages of doubtful validity. According to that law
marriagemay be solemnized between persons neither of whom profess the
Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, Parsi, Buddhist, Sikh or the Jaina religion
or between persons each of whom professes one or other of the Hindu,
Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina religions under certain conditions. Marriage under
the Act is solemnized by the “Registrar of Marriages under Act III of 1872.”
 Penalty on married person married again under this act:
Every person who, being at the time married, procures a marriage of himself to be
solemnized under this Act, shall be deemed to have committed an offence under
section 494 or section 495 of the penal code, as the case may be; and the marriage so
solemnized is void.
 Punishment of Bigamy under this act: Every person married under
this Act who, during the life time of his or her wife or husband, contracts any
other marriage, shall be subject to the penalties provided in sections 494 and
495 of the Penal Code for the offence of marrying again during the lifetime of a
husband or wife, whatever may be the religion which he or she professed at the
time of such second marriage.

7.  Relevant case references:
Case references no:1
Amaliammal vs Rayarswami And Ors. on 13 August, 198
1. This appeal by a private party is against the judgment of the learned Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul, acquitting the first accused who has
been charged with an offence under Section 494, I.P.C. and accused 2 and 3
who have been charged for offences under Section 494read with Section
109, I.P.C.
2. The appellant is the legally wedded wife of the first respondent, Rayarswami
and a daughter, Clara was born of the wedlock. The parties belong to Christian
Catholic community. The allegation against the first accused was that during
the subsistence of his marriage with the appellant he contracted a second
marriage with the second accused. Sundarammal, and therefore, has
committed an offence punishable under Section 484, I.P.C. The marriage is
said to have been performed in the house of the third accused at Thavasimadai
at the instigation of the third accused according to the appellant, the first
accused was in illicit intimacy with the second accused and was living with her
separately that the father of the first accused settled the properties in her
favour and favour of her daughter Clara that at the time of the marriage of
their daughter. Clara, the first accused, insisted on her executing a deed of
release and she accordingly executed a deed of release and later she filed a
civil suit in respect of that deed in Sub-Court, Dindigul, and that in that case
the first accused filed a written statement admitting the second marriage with
the second accused and then she made enquiries about the second marriage
and preferred the complaint before the Magistrate she would also say that the
first accused was converted to Hindu religion before his marriage with the
second accused.

8. 3. The defence was one of denial. The trial court came to the conclusion that
the prosecution has not proved the second marriage and that the court cannot
act on the admission of the first accused made in the written statement filed in
the civil suit on the file of the Sub-Court, Dindigul and in the end acquitted the
accused. The appellant, who is aggrieved, has filed this appeal.
4. The marriage between the first accused and the appellant is not disputed
though the first accused disputes the paternity of Clara in his answer to
questions under Section 313, Cr.P.C. The appellant has examined herself as
P.W. 1. She has not attended the second marriage and her evidence as regards
the treatment meted out to her by the first accused is not relevant for the
purpose of this case. The first accused has been charged for an offence
under Section 494, I.P.C. The essential ingredients of that Section are : (1) that
the accused should have contracted a marriage with the complainant : (2) that
the marriage should be subsisting at the time when the accused contracted a
second marriage : and (3) that the marriage must be valid and must be strictly
according to the law governing the parties.
5. The first condition is satisfied in this case. As regards the second condition,
the contention of the first accused is that he has not contracted a second
marriage it cannot be seriously disputed that the marriage between the first
accused and the appellant is subsisting. To prove the second marriage, the
prosecution has examined P.Ws. 2 and 3. Those witnesses spoke about the
marriage of the second accused with the first accused in the house of the third
accused on 18-6-1976 at about 7.00 a.m. According to them, a Brahmin priest
kindled the sacred fire and performed the marriage and that the first accused
tied a thali around the neck of the second accused and then they exchanged
garlands. We must recall to mind that the parties are Catholic Christians. The
question is whether there was a valid second marriage. It is not clear as to how
the first accused, a Catholic, married the second accused, who is said to be the
sister of the wife of the brother of the first accused and performed the
marriage in Hindu form. P.W. 1 would state in her evidence that the first

9. accused got himself converted as a Hindu and then performed the marriage
with the second accused her evidence is that the first accused admitted that he
got himself converted as a Hindu. She admitted that she did not make any
enquiry about it. About this conversion, there is hardly any evidence. The
complaint does not make any reference to the fact of conversion of the first
accused to the Hindu fold. The marriage itself was performed, according to the
prosecution, in the house of the third accused, a Christian, P.W. 2 admits in
his evidence that they felt that it was wrong to celebrate a marriage in
accordance with Hindu rites in the house of a Christian. P.W. 2 admits that
neither the first accused, nor the second accused invited him for the marriage.
P.W. 3 would state that he did not wish to stay in the house of the third
accused as a marriage was performed in accordance with Hindu rites in a
Christian house and as the first accused in marrying for a second time. Both
P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 have not reported the matter to the Parish Priest who said
to reside in the house next to that of the third accused where the marriage has
taken place. As the allegation in regard to conversion was not mentioned
either in the complaint or at any time earlier than the time of deposing in
Court by P. W. 1 no reliance can be placed on the evidence of P.W. 1 that the
first accused was converted as a Hindu and the marriage was celebrated. As
conversion is not proved, the marriage between two Christian in accordance
with the Hindu rites will not be a valid marriage. One of the vital ingredients
of the offence has not been made out.
6. But the counsel for the appellant placed reliance on an admission of the first
accused that he has married the second accused. That admission is contained
in a written statement in O.S. No. 118 of 1976 on the file of the Sub-ordinate
Judge, Dindigul. That written statement was filed in answer to the plaint filed
by the appellant and her daughter against the first accused praying for
cancellation of the release deed executed by the appellant and her daughter.
Clara Pandian, in favour of the first accused, rayarswami. In the written
statement, the first accused says in paragraph 12 that Sundaram Amal, the
second accused, is none other than the sister of the wife of the elder brother of

10. the first accused, that in view of the conduct of the appellant, he did not have
any connection whatsoever with her and that at the request and instance of
the members of the family of the first accused, the first accused married
Sundaram Ammal, the second accused, as his second wife. In the view of the
learned counsel for the appellant, this vital admission is enough to convict the
accused of the offence of bigamy under Section 494, I.P.C.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents pointed out that a mere
admission by an accused that he contracted a second marriage is not
enough. Kanwal Ram v. Himachal Pradeshadministration is a case where one
Kubja is said to have married one Kanwal Ram in September 1955, Kubja was
married to Sadh Ram some time in 1941. By the time the marriage between
Kanwal Ram and Kubja took place, the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 had come
into force. That Actprohibited the marriage of a Hindu during the lifetime of
his or her spouse. The evidence of the witness produced to prove the second
marriage, showed that the essential ceremonies had not been performed. But,
however, the Judicial Commissioner relied on the statement filed by Kubja in
answer to an application for restitution of conjugal rights filed by Sadhu Ram,
her husband, against Kubja ion which it was stated that Kubja married Kanwal
Ram after the marriage with Sadh Ram had been dissolved. The Supreme
Court took the view that the statement admitting the second marriage by the
accused will not be evidence of it for the purpose of proving the marriage in a
bigamy case. In a bigamy case, the second marriage, as a fact, has to be
proved. The ceremonies constituting the marriage must also be proved.
8. Learned counsel for the appellant invited my attention to 2356 of Canon
Law by Lincoln Bonscaren, S.J. and Adam C. Ellis, S.J., (second Edition).
9. The learned authors say :-
"BIGAMY. Bigamism, that is, those who in spite of the conjugal bond, attempt
another marriage, are ipso facto infamous : and if in spite of warning by the
ordinary they continue in the illicit relation so begun, they are to be punished

11. by ex-communication or personal interdict according to the gravity of the
case".
Canon law, as is seen from that book itself is "directed to the salvation of souls
and the purpose of all its regulations and laws is that men may live and die in
the holiness given to them by the grace of God". It is not clear as to how this
Canon Law could help the appellant in any way in proving the bigamy. In this
case there is no evidence to show that a valid second marriage has been
performed. The parties are Christians. But according to P.Ws. 2 and 3, the
marriage was performed according to Hindu rites. The mere admission by the
first accused in the written statement that he has married the second accused
will not satisfy the ingredients which are necessarily to be established by the
prosecution in a case under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. The
judgment acquitting all the accused is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.
10. Appeal dismissed.
Case references no:2
Priya Bala v. Suresh Chandra (AIR 1971 SC 1153) is also a case
between two Hindus. That was a case where one Priya Bala filed a complaint
against her husband alleging that he has committed an offence punishable
under Section 494, I.P.C. and that her husband had married one Sandhya
Rani as his second wife during the subsistence of her marriage with her
husband. The trial court, though the evidence was scanty, relied on an
admission made by the husband in an objection filed to the claim made by the
wife for maintenance under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
and found that the husband has married a second wife while the marriage with
the first wife was subsisting. The trial court convicted the husband. In appeal,
the Sessions, Judge held that the evidence did not establish that the essential
ceremonies constituting a valid marriage have been performed either in the
case of the marriage between the complainant and the accused or in respect of

12. the second marriage of the accused with Sandhya Rani. The Sessions Judge
acquitted the accused. The High Court, Calcutta, on appeal held that the
evidence establishes that a valid marriage according to Hindu Law, by which
the parties are governed, has taken place between the complainant and the
accused but regarding the second marriage, the High Court agreed with the
finding of the learned sessions Judge that the essential ceremonies to
constitute a valid marriage have not been proved to have taken place. In the
end, it confirmed the order of acquittal. One of the contentions before the
Supreme Court was that in view of the specific admission made by the accused
about the second marriage, it must be held that the accused is guilty of the
offence under Section 494, I.P.C. Their Lordships made a reference to Kanwal
Ram's case and have held that an admission is not evidence of the fact that the
second marriage has taken place after the ceremonies constituting a valid
marriage have been gone through. It is therefore clear that an admission of a
marriage by the accused is not evidence of it for the purpose of proving
marriage in a bigamy case.