Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India

Hey learners,

{tocify} $title={Table of Contents}

Case Summary

Citation: AIR 1995 SC 1531; (1995) 3 SCC 635
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Kuldip Singh and Justice R.M. Sahai
Date: 10 May 1995

Facts of the Case

The case revolved around the issue of bigamy and religious conversion to Islam for a second marriage. Several petitions were filed together, including that of Sarla Mudgal, the President of an NGO called Kalyani, which worked for women’s welfare.

The main issue was that Hindu men, already married under the Hindu Marriage Act, were converting to Islam to marry again without dissolving their first marriage. Since bigamy is prohibited under Hindu law but permitted under Muslim personal law, these men tried to misuse religious conversion as a tool to bypass the law.

Legal Issues

1. Whether a Hindu husband, married under Hindu Marriage Act, can solemnize a second marriage after converting to Islam without dissolving the first marriage.
2. Whether such a marriage would be valid under law.
3. Whether this practice violates the rights of the first wife.
4. The need for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) under Article 44 of the Constitution.

Arguments

Petitioners (Sarla Mudgal & others)

• Conversion was being misused as a device to commit bigamy.
• Such acts caused grave injustice to Hindu wives, as the husbands escaped punishment by converting.
• Urged the Court to provide clarity and prevent exploitation of women.

Respondents (Husbands who converted)

• Claimed that after conversion to Islam, they were governed by Muslim personal law, which permits more than one wife.
• Argued that their second marriages were legally valid under Islamic law.

Judgment of the Court

The Supreme Court held that:

• A Hindu husband, married under the Hindu Marriage Act, cannot marry again by converting to Islam without dissolving his first marriage.
• Such a second marriage would be void under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (offence of bigamy).
• Conversion to Islam does not dissolve the first Hindu marriage.
• The Court strongly emphasized the need for a Uniform Civil Code to ensure justice and equality in matters of marriage and succession.

Ratio Decidendi

Conversion to another religion does not dissolve a marriage solemnized under Hindu law. The husband remains bound by the Hindu Marriage Act, and a second marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage amounts to bigamy under IPC Section 494.

Legal Significance

• Landmark case protecting the rights of Hindu wives against misuse of religious conversion.
• Reinforced the importance of Article 44 (Uniform Civil Code) for national integration and gender justice.
• Set a precedent that personal law cannot be used as a shield to commit an offence.

The judgment in Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India is a historic step toward safeguarding women’s rights in marriage. It highlighted the misuse of religious conversion to escape legal obligations and underscored the urgent need for a Uniform Civil Code to ensure equality and justice across all religions.