E-Paper
Bigamy: Allahabad HC notice to AG seeks reply on plea challenging IPC section 494
Under IPC section 494, if a person marries for the second time during the lifetime of his wife or her husband without divorce, the marriage is void
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has issued a notice to the Attorney General (AG) of India on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by the Hindu Personal Law Board seeking declaration of section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as unconstitutional as it, as per the petitioner, discriminates between people on the basis of religion.
Under IPC section 494, if a person marries for the second time during the lifetime of his wife or her husband without divorce, the marriage is void. For this offence, there is a provision for seven years’ jail and fine. This law is applicable to Hindus, Sikhs and Christians except Muslims who have the right to marry four times as per the Muslim Personal Law (Shariah Application) Act 1937.
A division bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Justice Sabhash Vidyarthi passed the order on February 27 last on the PIL filed by Pawan Kumar Das Shastri, the general secretary of the Hindu Personal Law Board.
“Since validity of Muslim Personal (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, is under challenge in this PIL and also that a declaration has been sought from this court for declaring section 494 IPC to be ultra vires, let notices be issued to the Attorney General,” said the court.
The court granted six weeks’ time to the Attorney General to file reply. The court also ordered the Hindu Personal law Board to file its reply within two weeks after the Attorney General submits his reply. The court listed the case for next hearing after eight weeks.
Advocate Ashok Pandey, who represented the petitioner in court, said: “Section 494 of the IPC discriminates on the basis of religion. Therefore, it should be scrapped.” “The Hindu Personal Law Board is a trust registered under the Indian Trust Act formed for the protection and promotion of Hindu Personal Laws,” said Pandey.
Advocate SB Pandey, deputy solicitor general of India, assisted by advocate Anand Dwivedi represented the Central government.
“Common civil code is not applicable in the country. We find so many religious groups whose ancestors and GOD were polygamist. But they have been restrained by law to perform polygamy though it was part of their personal law,” said the petitioner.
