Can a Second Wife Unaware of Husband's Existing Marriage Face Bigamy Charges? Madras High Court Answers
The Madras High Court ruled that a woman who unknowingly marries a man with a subsisting prior marriage cannot face bigamy charges under BNS Section 82. Granting anticipatory bail to the second wife, the court noted that she was a victim of deception, not an offender. Scroll below to know more about the case.
The Madras High Court has observed that a woman who marries a man without knowing that his earlier marriage is still subsisting cannot be prosecuted for bigamy under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Justice N Ramesh made the observation while granting anticipatory bail to a petitioner named Rajalakshmi, who was named as the second accused in a bigamy case stemming from a matrimonial dispute.
Court Observations on Section 82 of BNS
The case originated from a complaint filed by the first wife of a man named Mayakrishnan, who alleged that Rajalakshmi had married him while his previous marriage was still active, reports Bar and Bench. Rajalakshmi maintained that Mayakrishnan concealed his first marriage from her, arguing that she was a victim of deception. Exposing Private Parts Without Physical Contact Not S*xual Assault: Madras High Court.
In evaluating the petition, Justice Ramesh emphasised the clear text of the law governing bigamy, which replaced Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. "On the plain language of the (provision punishing bigamy), the offender is the person who already has a living spouse; a person who is herself unmarried and marries such a person, without knowledge of the subsisting marriage, does not thereby become an offender under Section 82," the court said.
The Court noted that while whether Rajalakshmi was genuinely unaware of the marriage must be tested during investigation and trial, the prosecution failed to produce material at the anticipatory bail stage showing she possessed prior knowledge.
Inapplicability of Cruelty Charges
The bench also reviewed additional charges brought by police under Section 85 of the BNS, which punishes cruelty by a husband or his relatives. The Court found this charge prima facie inapplicable to Rajalakshmi, reasoning that a second wife deceived about a prior marriage does not become a relative of the husband's first wife. “She and the de facto complainant occupy, on the petitioner’s case, the position of the two women deceived and wronged by the same man, not that of an accused and her victim," the court added.
Procedure and Bail Grant
The High Court further referenced a March 2026 ruling from the Calcutta High Court, which held that offences related to the concealment of an earlier marriage under Section 82(2) of the BNS are non-cognisable and must proceed as a private complaint rather than a police case. While leaving the broader question of the case's survival open for later stages, the Court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. 'Wife Not a Pug in a Vodafone Ad': Madras High Court Dissolves Marriage Over Career Relocation.
Rajalakshmi was granted anticipatory bail under specific conditions. The Court clarified that its observations were strictly prima facie for the bail application and would not influence the ongoing investigation against Mayakrishnan or other co-accused. "Nothing in this order shall enure to the benefit of Mayakrishnan (the first accused) or the other co-accused, and the investigation against them shall proceed uninfluenced by anything stated herein," the Madras High Court stated.
(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Sep 15, 2026 03:46 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).
