Death of First Wife Does Not Validate Second Marriage

Source: Orissa High Court 

Why in News? 

The Division Bench of Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and Chittaranjan Dash in the case of Kankalata Dwivedi v. State of Odisha & Ors. (2025) held that solemnization of second marriage by a Hindu man during subsistence of his first marriage does not get legitimized upon the death of the first wife, thereby denying family pension to the second wife. 

What was the Background of Kankalata Dwivedi v. State of Odisha & Ors. (2025) Case? 

• The appellant was the second wife of a former government employee who sought family pension upon his death. 
• She filed a writ petition before the Orissa High Court after being denied family pension benefits. 
• The High Court directed the opposite party authority to consider the writ petition as her representation and decide her entitlement accordingly. 
• The Controller of Accounts, Odisha passed an order rejecting her claim on the ground that she was the second wife of the ex-government employee. 
• As per Rule 56(6)(d) of the Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992, she was not entitled to receive family pension. 
• Being aggrieved by this order, she again approached the High Court seeking nullification of the authority's decision. 
• The Single Bench upheld the impugned order, finding no fault with the findings of the authority. 
• She then preferred an intra-court appeal before the Division Bench challenging the Single Judge's order. 

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court observed that the appellant entered into wedlock with the deceased employee during the subsistence of his first marriage with another woman, which itself constitutes the offence of bigamy punishable under Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 495 of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code. 
• The bench remarked that granting family pension to the second wife would amount to placing premium on illegality. 
• The Court clarified that family pension under the Rules is payable to the widow on the death of an employee subject to complying with certain terms and conditions, and to be a widow, a valid marriage between the woman and the deceased employee is a sine qua non. 
• Justice Shripad emphasized that the word 'wives' appearing in the Rules does not authorize an employee to contract marriage with multiple persons by way of polygamy or polyandry. 
• The Court held that the use of the term 'wives' in the Rules does not give a license to a government employee to enter into multiple marriages against the avowed objectives of the Hindu Marriage Act as well as the IPC. 
• The Court categorically held that the Hindu Marriage Act does not recognize childlessness as a justifiable circumstance for entering into wedlock with a person who is already in subsisting wedlock with another. 
• The bench rejected the argument that even if the second marriage was void ab initio due to the subsisting first marriage, it gets legitimized upon the subsequent death of the first wife, noting this was not supported by any standard treatises on Hindu Law of Marriage. 
• The Court applied the maxim "ex nihilo nihil fit" (out of nothing, nothing comes out), holding that what is void ab initio does not become valid by the happening of a subsequent event. 
• Resultantly, the Court upheld the order of the Single Judge and dismissed the writ appeal, negating the entitlement of the appellant to family pension as she was the second wife of the employee. 

What is Bigamy and its Punishment under Indian Law? 

About: 

• Bigamy constitutes one of the most serious matrimonial offenses under Indian law, representing a fundamental breach of the monogamous marriage system. 
• The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, collectively provide a comprehensive legal framework addressing bigamy as an offence. 
• These statutes establish both the civil and criminal consequences of entering into a subsequent marriage while a previous marriage remains valid and subsisting. 
• The law aims to protect the sanctity of marriage and safeguard the rights of all parties involved in matrimonial relationships. 

Civil Provisions under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: 

• Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, declares any marriage between two Hindus as void ab initio if either party has a living spouse at the time of the subsequent marriage ceremony. 
• This provision operates with retrospective effect from the commencement of the Act, ensuring that no valid matrimonial relationship can be established through bigamous unions. 
• The section creates an absolute prohibition without exceptions, making such marriages legally non-existent rather than merely voidable. 
• The civil consequence is that the subsequent marriage confers no legal rights, obligations, or status upon the parties. 
• Children born from such union are considered illegitimate under traditional legal principles, though recent judicial interpretations have provided some protection to innocent children. 

Criminal Sanctions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: 

• Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita prescribes stringent criminal punishment for the offense of bigamy, establishing a two-tier punishment structure based on the presence or absence of concealment. 
• Under subsection (1), any person who marries while having a living spouse faces imprisonment of either description for up to seven years, along with liability to pay a fine. 
• Subsection (2) imposes enhanced punishment of up to ten years imprisonment along with fine when the offender conceals the fact of the previous marriage from the subsequent spouse. 
• This enhanced punishment recognizes the additional element of fraud and deception involved in such cases. 

Legal Exceptions and Mitigating Circumstances: 

• The criminal law recognizes certain exceptional circumstances that exempt individuals from prosecution for bigamy, reflecting the legislature's understanding of complex human situations. 
• The primary exception applies when a competent court has declared the previous marriage void, thereby removing the legal impediment to remarriage. 
• The law provides relief in cases where a spouse has been absent continuously for seven years without any communication, creating a presumption of death while requiring full disclosure to the prospective spouse. 
• These exceptions balance the strict application of matrimonial law with practical realities and humanitarian considerations. 
• The exceptions ensure that individuals are not trapped in impossible legal situations due to circumstances beyond their control.