New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has allowed criminal proceedings for bigamy to continue against a man who remarried in the United Kingdom just 33 days after obtaining a divorce decree from a UK court. The Court held that a foreign divorce decree granted on a ground not recognised under the applicable Indian matrimonial law cannot automatically dissolve a marriage solemnised in India under Hindu rites.
In N. Sridhar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others (2026 INSC 1191), decided on November 3, 2026, a Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar dismissed the husband's appeal while allowing the appeals filed by his parents and second wife. Consequently, the bigamy proceedings against the husband will continue, whereas the criminal proceedings against the other three appellants were quashed.
Background of the Case
The husband married his first wife on April 18, 2003, under Hindu rites and ceremonies in Andhra Pradesh. The couple subsequently moved to the United Kingdom. Following matrimonial disputes, the husband initiated divorce proceedings in India, but his divorce petition was dismissed. His subsequent appeal was also withdrawn, leaving the first marriage legally subsisting.
After acquiring British citizenship on February 1, 2013, the husband approached the Cambridge County Court in the United Kingdom for divorce. The foreign court granted a decree nisi on November 27, 2013, followed by an absolute divorce decree on January 29, 2014, on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Only 33 days after the divorce decree became absolute, on March 3, 2014, the husband contracted a second marriage in Norfolk, United Kingdom.
The first wife subsequently lodged a criminal complaint alleging bigamy and criminal conspiracy under Sections 494 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 34. The husband, his parents and his second wife approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings. After the High Court rejected their petitions, they challenged the decision before the Supreme Court.
Whether the UK Divorce Decree Could Be Recognised in India?
The principal issue before the Supreme Court was whether the divorce decree granted by the Cambridge County Court could be recognised in India and relied upon by the husband to escape prosecution for bigamy.
The Court examined Sections 13 and 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which deal with the recognition and conclusiveness of foreign judgments in India.
Relying on the principles laid down in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi (1991), the Bench reiterated that a foreign matrimonial decree must satisfy the requirements governing recognition of foreign judgments, including the applicable matrimonial law and jurisdictional requirements.
The Court noted that the UK divorce was granted on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, which was not a statutory ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, applicable to the parties' marriage.
Accordingly, the foreign divorce decree could not automatically be treated as dissolving the first marriage under Indian law.
Change of Nationality Cannot Automatically Defeat Bigamy Proceedings
The husband also contended that he had acquired British citizenship before contracting the second marriage and that the second marriage had taken place outside India. He relied on Section 4 of the IPC to challenge the applicability of Indian criminal law.
The Supreme Court did not accept these submissions as grounds for quashing the proceedings. The Bench considered the fact that the first marriage had been solemnised in India under Hindu rites and that its legal status could not be defeated merely by subsequently acquiring foreign citizenship.
The Court's examination also took into account the circumstances surrounding the foreign divorce decree and the fact that the earlier Indian matrimonial proceedings had not resulted in dissolution of the marriage.
Thus, the husband's change of nationality and the location of his second marriage were not sufficient, by themselves, to terminate the bigamy prosecution.
Proceedings Against Parents and Second Wife Quashed
While allowing the criminal proceedings against the husband to continue, the Supreme Court granted relief to his parents and second wife.
Regarding the parents, the Court found insufficient material demonstrating their active participation, overt acts or agreement to commit the alleged offence. Mere knowledge of the second marriage was not enough, by itself, to establish criminal conspiracy.
Similarly, the Court found that the available material did not sufficiently establish that the second wife knowingly participated in the alleged offence or was aware that the husband's first marriage continued to subsist.
The Bench emphasised that criminal liability must be assessed individually. A person cannot be prosecuted merely because of their relationship with the principal accused or their association with the alleged second marriage, without sufficient material establishing the necessary elements of the offence.
Supreme Court's Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the husband's appeal and allowed the criminal proceedings under Section 494 IPC to continue against him.
However, it allowed the appeals filed by his parents and second wife and quashed the criminal proceedings against them.
The Court's decision was limited to examining whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed at that stage. It did not determine the husband's guilt, which remains a matter for trial.
Legal Significance of the Judgment
The decision reinforces the principle that foreign matrimonial decrees are not automatically recognised in India. A foreign divorce must satisfy the requirements of Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the principles governing recognition of matrimonial judgments.
It also highlights that acquiring foreign citizenship does not automatically eliminate the legal consequences of a marriage solemnised under Indian law. Where the first marriage continues to subsist under the applicable law, a subsequent marriage may give rise to criminal consequences, subject to the requirements of the offence and the applicable law.
At the same time, the judgment underscores the importance of establishing individual criminal liability. Allegations of bigamy or conspiracy cannot automatically justify prosecution of every person connected with the alleged second marriage.
Case: N. Sridhar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others
Citation: 2026 INSC 1191
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decision Date: November 3, 2026
Bench: Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar