HC holds 2nd marriage during pendency of wife’s appeal a ‘brazen breach of law’; husband sentenced to 3-month jail

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that contracting a second marriage while the wife’s appeal against the divorce decree is pending—despite the operation of an interim stay—constitutes civil contempt, observing that such conduct “renders the appeal infructuous” and leaves the aggrieved spouse remediless.

Justice Alka Sarin sentenced the husband to three months’ simple imprisonment along with a Rs 2,000 fine under the Contempt of Courts Act after finding a wilful violation of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Justice Sarin observed that the wife’s appeal was filed within limitation on March 12, 2020, and operation of the impugned divorce decree stood stayed on August 13, 2020. Despite this, the husband admittedly solemnised a second marriage on January 3, 2021.

“The only plea taken by the respondent-husband is that he was never served and that he gained knowledge about the pendency of the matter on February 23, 2021. It has further been stated that there cannot be endless time limit for the spouse not to re-marry and he re-married only after the grant of decree of divorce and that the appeal pending before this court has still not been decided,” Justice Sarin observed.

The Bench added that he tendered an unconditional apology only after the court pointed out his violation. Rejecting the apology, Justice Sarin held that the breach was deliberate. “The apology in the present case cannot be accepted for the reason that there has been wilful contravention of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Even if the argument of counsel for the respondent-husband as regards the fact that respondent-husband was not served in the appeal is to be taken on its face value, he admittedly never made enquiries within the prescribed period of limitation regarding filing of the appeal,” the court observed.

Justice Sarin observed his act and conduct was such that “the clock cannot be put back and the damage which has ensued cannot be rectified”. It virtually rendered the appeal filed by the petitioner-wife infructuous and her remediless. The wife and her daughter even missed out the chance to partake in any reconciliation process.

Referring to the binding precedents, the court held that solemnisation of the second marriage after the filing of a duly-filed appeal and during subsistence of the stay order “amounts to civil contempt”. The breach, the court added, struck at the sanctity of judicial orders and could not be treated lightly.

“Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, this court deems it proper to impose punishment upon the respondent-husband for civil contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act,” Justice Sarin concluded.