BRIJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal involves a very simple issue but when the background facts are considered it projects some highly emotional and sensitive aspects of human life.

(2.) CHALLENGE in this appeal is to the judgment of the madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the 'c. P. C. ' ).

(3.) IN support of the appeal learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as the factual position which is almost undisputed goes to show, there was in fact no consummation of marriage as the parties were living separately for a very long period practically from the date of marriage. That being so, an inference that Mishri Bai ceased to be a married woman, has been rightly recorded by the trial court and the first appellate court. It was also pointed out that the question of law framed proceeded on a wrong footing as if the consent of husband was necessary. There was no such stipulation in law. It is contented that the question as was considered by the High court was not specifically dealt with by the trial court or the first appellate court. Strong reliance has been placed on a decision of this Court in Jolly Das (Smt.) Alias Moulick v. Tapan Ranjan Das [1994 (4) SCC 363] to highlight the concept of "sham Marriage".