BACK TO SECTIONS(1995) 3 SCC 635
BailableCognizable: Non-CognizableMagistrate First Class
THE STATUTE
Original Text
Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Simplified
Section 494 punishes bigamy — entering into a second marriage while the first marriage is still legally valid. It applies to all persons whose personal law prohibits polygamy: Hindus, Christians, Parsis, and those married under the Special Marriage Act. The landmark Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) ruled that a Hindu converting to Islam solely to bypass the bigamy law is still liable under Section 494 — conversion does not retrospectively void the first Hindu marriage for criminal law purposes.
Legal Evolution
Sarla Mudgal (1995) addressed a pattern where Hindu husbands converted to Islam and remarried, claiming Muslim personal law allows polygamy. The Supreme Court rejected this as a criminal law evasion device.
Landmark Precedents
Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)
RELEVANCE
A Hindu husband who converts to Islam and remarries remains guilty under Section 494 — conversion does not retrospectively void the first Hindu marriage for criminal law purposes.
Practical Scenarios
"A man marrying a second woman while his first wife is alive and they are not legally divorced — Section 494."
"A woman marrying a second time without legally nullifying her first marriage — Section 494."
Common Queries
It depends on personal law. For Hindus, Christians, Parsis, and those married under the Special Marriage Act, it is a crime. Muslim personal law allows limited polygamy, so Section 494 typically does not apply to a Muslim man's second marriage (unless married under the Special Marriage Act).