Legal provisions regarding Same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted under section 495 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted:
“Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section having concealed from the person with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted, the fact of the former marriage, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
Image Source: coyotechronicle.net
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The offence under Section 495 is an aggravated form of the offence defined in Section 494. Where there is concealment of the fact of a former marriage from the person with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted the punishment under Section 495 may extend up to 10 years of imprisonment and fine.
No court shall take cognizance of the offence, under Section 495 except upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved by such offence. The offence under Section 495 is non- cognizable but warrant should ordinarily issue. It is bailable but not compoundable, and is triable by Magistrate of the first class. However, in Andhra Pradesh it is cognizable and non-bailable.
The points requiring proof under Section 495 are:
ADVERTISEMENTS:
i) The accused had already been married;
ii) Such marriage was legal;
iii) The person with whom he was married was still alive;
iv) The accused married another person;
ADVERTISEMENTS:
v) The accused had, before his second marriage, concealed from his spouse the fact of the previous marriage.
Section 495 punishes for a concealment of the fact of the former marriage, only when that marriage offers an impediment to the validity of the subsequent marriage. The question what amounts to the concealment of the fact of the former marriage is evidently a question of fact. For there may be as much concealment by making a misleading statement as by not making any statement at all.
It is not necessary that the concealment should have affected the consent given to the second marriage nor, indeed, is its operation upon the mind of the other at all material, the only point material being that he had concealed the fact of his previous marriage.