494 vs 82

IPC 494/BNS 82 targets one of the oldest marriage frauds — marrying again while a legally valid prior marriage subsists. The offence has three essential elements: (1) the accused was previously married; (2) that marriage is still legally subsisting (not dissolved by divorce or death of spouse); and (3) the accused contracts another marriage. The critical legal principle is that the first marriage must be valid and subsisting at the time of the second marriage. A divorce decree, annulment, or the death of the first spouse before the second marriage are complete defences. The most significant case interpreting Section 494 is Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995), where the Supreme Court addressed the specific tactic of Hindu husbands converting to Islam solely to exploit Islamic personal law's polygamy permission. The Court held emphatically that religious conversion does not retrospectively void the first Hindu marriage — the first marriage remains a valid Hindu marriage for criminal law purposes, and the second marriage therefore attracts Section 494. The Court further observed that the use of personal law pluralism to commit bigamy was a violation of constitutional equality. BNS 82 consolidates IPC 494 and 495 into a single tiered provision, removing the drafting burden of charging two separate sections while preserving the escalated penalty for fraudulent concealment. The concealment aggravation is particularly important where the second spouse is an innocent victim who was deceived into the marriage.