Family Law Case

PRESTIGE INSTITUTE I NSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH

DEPARTMENT OF LAW

LIBRARY LIBR ARY ASSIGNMENT ASSIGN MENT – FAMILY FAMILY LAW CASE

Submitted To:

P"o#$ Ru%&'i R&t(o"e

Submitted B!:

A&!u)( A"o"& BA$LL$B *"d )em

A+,-o.'ed/eme-t In performing our assignment, I had to take the help and guideline of  some respected persons, who deserve my greatest gratitude. The completion of this assignment gives me much Pleasure. I would like to show our gratitude towards Prof. Ru%&'i R&t(o"e for giving me good guideline for assignment throughout numerous consultations. I would also like to expand my deepest gratitude to all those who have directly and indirectly guided me in writing this assignment. I would also like to express my gratitude towards the librarian of my institution for providing me with the necessary books and materials for  the project. Many people, especially my classmates, have made valuable comment suggestions on this proposal which gave me an inspiration to improve my assignment. I thank all the people for their help directly and indirectly to complete my assignment.

 Sarla Mudgal v. Union Of India

Cou"tupreme !ourt of India De+ided "# May "$$% Cit&tio- &I' "$$% ! "%(" Ho'di-/)The second marriage was considered void. L&.) &%%'ied  *aw of passing off under ection +$+ IP! Be-+(:

". uldip ingh, -. '.M ahai I-t"odu+tio-:

In the most simplest manner, this case is in regards to bigamy and if coversion to another religion permits to commit the offence. F&+t)  In the arla Mudgal v. nion of India, there were two main  petitioners. The first was alyani, a /01 that works with needy and distressed women, which is headed by arla Mudgal. The next petitioner  was Meena Mathur, married to 2itender Mathur, in "$33, Meena finds that 2itender converted to Islam and solemni4ed second marriage with unita /arula, also known as 5athima. Meena Mathur complains that her husband converted to Islam only for the purposes of getting married again and circumvented the provisions of ection +$+ of IP!. "

1

6ection +$+ of the Indian Penal !ode6

In 7rit Petition +-+ of "$$-, 0eeta 'ani, married to Pradeep umar alleged physical and mental violence by her husband. he later found out that her husband, Pradeep, eloped and married another woman after converting to Islam, in "$$". ushmita 0hosh, petitioner in !ivil 7rit Petition %#$ of "$$- married 0. !. 0hosh according to 8indu rituals in "$3+. The husband told her that she wanted a divorce and the petitioner argued that she was the legally wedded wife. The husband embraced Islam and wanted to get married to 9inita 0upta. The petitioner has  prayed to not let her husband to enter a marriage with 9inita 0upta. In the case ection +$+ of IP!, article "+, "% -# were discussed in details. The court discussed in detail these two issues: ". 7hether a 8indu husband married under 8indu law is allowed to embrace Islam and then second another; -. 7hether the husband can be charged under +$+ of IP!;

0ud/eme-t – The !ourt held that the first marriage would have to be dissolved under the 8indu Marriage &ct, "$%%. The man