Report No. 156
113. Substitution of new section for section 494: Bigamy.-
(a) Do you agree that Explanation 1 be added to section 494 in the Penal Code as a consequence of Supreme Court decision in Bhaurao v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1964. In the following manner:-
"Explanation 1.-For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to marry again whatever legal defect there may be in contracting, celebrating or performing such later marriage"?
(b) Do you agree that Explanation 2 to section 494 be added as a result of Law Commission's recommendations by which it is made clear that where the relevant divorce law prohibits re-marriage of a party within a specified period after a decree of dissolution, such re-marriage amounts to bigamy in the following manner:-
"Where a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of a competent court but the parties are, by virtue of a provision of the enactment under which their marriage is dissolved, prohibited from re-marrying within a specified period, then for the purposes of this section, marriage shall, notwithstanding its dissolution, be deemed to subsist during that period"?
Explanation 3 is proposed to be added to section 494 incorporating the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Sarla Mudgal's case reported in AIR 1995 SC 1531. Explanation 3 reads as follows:
Explanation 3.-The offence is committed when any person converts himself or herself to another religion for the purpose of marrying again during the subsistence of the earlier marriage.
Back
