People have converted to different religions on multiple occasions in an attempt to benefit from one over the other. This article focuses on situations in which individuals abandoned their religion in order to benefit from the private laws of other faiths. One of the situations where a spouse changed to Islam in order to marry a different woman without annulling their earlier marriage, which had been formally recognized by Hindu marriage laws, is sarla mudgal vs union of india.
sarla mudgal vs union of india Case Facts
- The article 32 indian constitution has been the subject of numerous petitions filed with the Supreme Court. In this case, Sarla Mudgal served as the president of the Kalyani NGO, which assisted disadvantaged women.
- Meena Mathur, the spouse of Jitender Mathur, discovered that her husband had wed Sunita Narula, also known as Fathima. In order to formalize this marriage, they converted to Islam and took up the faith, a move that was met with resistance from Fathima. Therefore, section 494 of the ipc is relevant to this case.
- Additionally, a second petition was filed in which Sunita Narula claimed that Jitender Mathur had returned to Hinduism as a result of being influenced by his Hindu wife Meena Mathur and her children.
- Jitender Mathur agreed to retain his first Hindu wife and their children from their pre-marriage union, but he declined to retain his second wife, who remained Muslim and was not protected by any personal laws, either Hindu or Muslim.
- Again, in a distinct case, the respondent Pradeep Kumar was married in 1988 as per Hindu custom by the petitioner Geeta Rani. The petitioner claimed that after her husband had abused her, he had eloped with Deepa, married her, and converted to Islam. Additionally, this petition claimed that converting to Islam would avoid the section 494 of the ipc.
sarla mudgal vs union of india Issues
- Can a Hindu man convert to Islam and formally consummate his second marriage without ending his first?
- Is it lawful to get married in this way without getting the first marriage dissolved?
- Would the apostate husband be subject to penalties under section 494 of indian penal code, 1860?
Contentions by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Altogether, the petitioners claimed that the respondents converted to Islam in order to legally consummate their second marriage to other women and avoid the bigamy regulations found in Section 494 IPC.
Respondent:
- Despite having a first wife who is still Hindu, all of the respondents argued that they may have up to four wives after converting to Islam. The Indian Penal Code and the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 do not apply to them.
sarla mudgal vs union of india Judgment
The rights of the spouse who remains a Hindu would be eliminated if one of the parties was allowed to end the marriage by establishing and executing a new personal law. Therefore, a marriage consummated in accordance with the hindu marriage law is unbreakable until the circumstances listed in Section 13 of the same legislation are met, and any subsequent marriage that does not comply with this clause is unlawful and goes against justice, equity, and morality.
The two legal systems must cooperate harmoniously with one another. The court further decided that section 494 of the ipc will convict the apostate husband. The Indian Penal Code and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 use distinct definitions of “void.” The court further decided that Indians will not violate one another’s personal laws because the uniform civil code (UCC) is required. UCC must thus be safeguarded.
Judge R.M. Sahai expressed dissent, but only in relation to the UCC matter; he did not express disagreement with the IPC’s punishment of second marriages following conversion to Islam. According to Hon. Justice R.M. Sahai:
- The implementation of UCC would cause more harm than benefit, leading to discontent and religious division.
- Only in an atmosphere of mutual understanding between adherents of all religions can uniform personal law be established.
- To prevent any religion from abusing its power, the government must form a commission to draft the “Conversion of Religion Act.” This law will apply to all citizens, regardless of their faith, and it will forbid anyone from changing their religion in order to get married.
The Sarla Mudgal ruling is a noteworthy precedent that supports the Uniform Civil Code. The ruling brought to light cases in which competing religious personal laws have created legal quandaries. Notably, the ruling declared, in accordance with Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, that a Hindu husband’s second marriage was null and void. In rendering his decision, Justice Kuldip Singh stated that there is no justification for delaying the implementation of a “uniform civil code” for all Indian residents, given that more than 80% of the country’s population is already subject to codified personal rules.
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf
