BAI GANGA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in this case have been convicted under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, which provides punishment for marrying again during the lifetime of a husband in all cases where such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the lifetime of such husband.

(2.) The facts upon which the conviction has proceeded are not disputed and are these:

(3.) The first accused Ganga was married to the complainant about eighteen years ago, she then being about six years old and the complainant being about nine. The marriage was not consummated and shortly after it the complainant proceeded to Kimberly in South Africa for the purpose of earning his livelihood. During his absence there, though he did write to his own uncle, it appears that he did not communicate with his wife Ganga, nor did he furnish her with maintenance. Ultimately in the absence of the husband a, fargati was obtained by the caste, who took a sum of Rs. 110 from the accused No. 3 and the palla ornaments. Upon the faith of this fargati accused No. 1 re-married with the accused No. 2 on the 6th of June 1916. Four days later the original husband returned from Kimberly. The only question is whether the second marriage was void by reason of its taking place during the lifetime of the first husband, the complainant.