Case name: Binod Kumar Singh v. Union of India
Case number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction No. 8078 of 2007
Read Complete Judgment Click Here
Before we discuss the details of the case let us first understand Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. Section 5(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act states that:- “A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus if the following conditions are satisfied:-(i) Neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage.”
Further, Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 states that if any marriage is solemnized after the commencement of this act shall be null and void if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv), and (v) of Section 5.
Now let us discuss this case and what Patna High Court held:-
The appellant (Husband) was working as Assistant Sub-Inspector in Central Reserve Police Force (C.R.P.F) and had solemnized his second marriage with Sunita Upadhayay during the subsistence of the first marriage of the appellant.
Later, her wife filed a complaint before the competent authority in CRPF regarding the same and hence departmental proceeding was initiated against the appellant. After completion of the departmental proceeding, the concerned conducting officer found all the charges proved and the appellant guilty and, thereafter, the appellant was dismissed from service.
Thereafter, an appeal was made which too dismissed by the learned Single Judge of Patna High Court. Then appeal was preferred before the Divisional Bench of the Patna High Court.
The appellant contended that the first wife of the appellant filed an affidavit mentioning therein that the appellant had solemnized his marriage with Sunita Upadhyay with her permission and consent. He further submits that neither the concerned authorities nor the learned Single Judge took into consideration the above-stated fact, and as a result, whereof, the Disciplinary Authority as well as the learned Single Judge came to the wrong conclusion.
The Divisional bench of Patna High Court comprising Justices Hemant Kumar Srivastava and Prabhat Kumar Singh upheld the decision of the Single Judge and said that it is presumed that the first wife of the appellant had given her consent for the second marriage then also, the aforesaid consent of first wife of the appellant does not give the right to the appellant to solemnize second marriage during the lifetime of the first wife. Moreover, the Court said that the counsel for the appellant could not succeed to point out any violation of natural justice or any violation of rules.