Can A Foreign Divorce Decree & Change Of Citizenship Protect A Husband From Bigamy Prosecution In India? Supreme Court Answers

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has ruled that a foreign divorce decree obtained contrary to Indian matrimonial law and a subsequent change of citizenship cannot protect a husband from bigamy prosecution under Section 494 IPC. However, the Court quashed criminal proceedings against his parents and second wife because the evidence of their involvement was insufficient.

A Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar delivered the judgment on November 3, 2026, in N. Sridhar Reddy v. State of A.P., while deciding three connected criminal appeals.

Read Also:- Validity of Foreign Decree of Divorce in India

The case involved a doctor who married in Andhra Pradesh on April 18, 2003, according to Hindu customs. The couple later moved to the United Kingdom, where he worked as a doctor.

In 2007, the wife returned to India for childbirth. According to the husband, she refused to return to the UK despite his repeated requests.

As matrimonial disputes increased, the husband filed divorce and child custody proceedings before an Indian court. However, his divorce petition was dismissed, and he later withdrew his appeal before the High Court.

The husband obtained British citizenship on February 1, 2013, and subsequently approached the County Court in Cambridge for divorce.

Despite objections regarding the foreign court's jurisdiction, the UK court granted him a divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The decree became final on January 29, 2014.

On March 3, 2014, the husband remarried in the United Kingdom.

Read Also:- Foreign Divorce Not Valid in India? Supreme Court Clears Big Confusion for NRI Marriages, Says “This Ground is Not Recognised Under the HMA”

Nearly two years later, on February 1, 2016, a criminal complaint was filed against him and his family members, alleging bigamy and criminal conspiracy under Sections 494, 120B and 34 IPC.

The husband, his parents and second wife approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. However, the High Court dismissed their petitions on July 8, 2019, prompting them to approach the Supreme Court.

The husband's counsel argued that he had already become a British citizen before his second marriage in the UK. Therefore, relying on Section 4 IPC, he contended that Indian criminal law could not apply to his alleged acts committed abroad.

He further submitted that the UK divorce decree was legally valid, that the first wife had participated in the foreign proceedings, and that the criminal complaint was filed after considerable delay with the intention of harassing him.

Opposing these arguments, it was submitted that the original marriage was solemnised under Hindu law and that the foreign divorce was granted on a ground not recognised under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The Supreme Court examined Sections 13 and 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which govern the recognition of foreign judgments in India. It also considered its earlier decisions in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi and Satya v. Teja Singh.

The Court held that a foreign divorce decree cannot automatically be recognised in India when it is contrary to the matrimonial law governing the parties.

It observed that the husband's earlier divorce proceedings in India had failed, while the subsequent UK divorce was granted on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, which is not a statutory ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.

The Supreme Court also rejected the argument that British citizenship and remarriage abroad could remove the legal consequences arising from a marriage that continued to subsist under Indian law.

The Court further refused to quash the husband's prosecution merely because the criminal complaint was filed nearly two years after his second marriage.

Read Also:- Grounds for Divorce for NRI in Foreign Land

However, the Supreme Court took a different view regarding the criminal proceedings against the husband's parents.

The prosecution alleged that they had conspired with their son by arranging property transactions and encouraging his second marriage.

The Court found no sufficient evidence of any agreement, active participation or specific act connecting them to the alleged criminal conspiracy.

Relying on Sivaraman Nair v. State of Kerala and S. Nitheen v. State of Kerala, the Court reiterated that mere knowledge of a second marriage cannot automatically establish criminal conspiracy.

The Supreme Court also examined the allegations against the second wife, whose name had initially been removed from the chargesheet by the investigating agency due to insufficient evidence.

However, the Magistrate subsequently took cognisance against her without providing reasons.

The Court found no sufficient material showing that she had knowingly participated in the alleged offence or was consciously aware that the husband's first marriage remained legally subsisting.

It emphasised that criminal liability must be established separately against each accused, and mere association or family relationships cannot justify criminal prosecution without supporting evidence.

Read Also:- NRI Divorce Litigation in India: Step By Step Legal Guide, Real Cases, Real Data, Real Struggles

Accordingly, the Supreme Court refused to quash the bigamy proceedings against the husband under Section 494 IPC, but quashed the criminal proceedings against his parents and second wife.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Foreign Divorce No Shield: Supreme Court refused to quash the husband's bigamy case despite his UK divorce decree.
• Citizenship Change No Defence: British citizenship and remarriage abroad could not automatically defeat Indian matrimonial law.
• Husband's Parents Get Relief: The Supreme Court quashed criminal conspiracy charges against his parents due to lack of evidence.
• Second Wife Gets Relief: The Court quashed proceedings against the second wife, finding insufficient evidence of her knowing involvement.
• Relatives Cannot Be Implicated Without Evidence: The Supreme Court ruled that mere family relationships or knowledge of a second marriage cannot establish criminal conspiracy.