Citation: 1995 SCC (3) 635 (also cited as AIR 1995 SC 1531) | Court: Supreme Court of India (two-judge bench: Kuldip Singh and R.M. Sahai, JJ.) | Decided: 10 May 1995 | Status: Good law -- binding precedent, consistently followed and reaffirmed, including in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000).
In Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that a Hindu husband who converts to Islam solely to contract a second marriage, without his first marriage under Hindu law being validly dissolved, does not thereby escape prosecution for bigamy -- because the first marriage subsists in law until dissolved by a competent court under the Hindu Marriage Act, and religious conversion alone cannot dissolve it.
Case background and the legal question
The case arose from petitions filed by first wives whose husbands had converted to Islam and remarried
without first obtaining a divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The husbands argued that, having
converted, they were no longer bound by Hindu law's monogamy requirement and could validly take a second
wife under Muslim personal law, which permits polygamy in certain circumstances. The Supreme Court had to
decide whether a change of religion, by itself, dissolves a subsisting Hindu marriage, and whether a second
marriage contracted on that basis exposes the husband to prosecution for bigamy.
What the Supreme Court held
The Court held that a marriage solemnized under Hindu law can only be dissolved on grounds and through
the procedure recognized by the Hindu Marriage Act -- conversion to another religion is not, by itself, one
of those grounds. The first marriage therefore continues to subsist in the eyes of the law even after the
husband's conversion, and a second marriage contracted while the first still subsists is void and can
attract prosecution for bigamy under the Indian Penal Code (now the equivalent provision in the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita). The Court reasoned that permitting conversion-driven remarriage to escape monogamy
obligations would allow the personal-law system to be manipulated purely as a device to defeat matrimonial
obligations. The judgment also included observations, not binding as precedent, urging the government to
consider a Uniform Civil Code under Article 44 of the Constitution.
Why this matters for NRIs, and the case's status today
This ruling is relevant to NRIs navigating personal law questions across religions and jurisdictions,
particularly where a second marriage -- whether contracted in India or abroad -- is asserted to be valid on
the basis that the first marriage's personal law no longer applies after conversion. It also matters for
first spouses seeking to establish that their marriage remains legally subsisting for maintenance,
inheritance, or custody purposes despite the other spouse's conversion and remarriage. The ruling remains
good law and was expressly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000), which
rejected a challenge to the Sarla Mudgal principle.
Can a Hindu husband legally remarry simply by converting to Islam?
No -- conversion alone does not dissolve a subsisting Hindu marriage. Unless the first marriage has been
formally dissolved by a competent court under the Hindu Marriage Act, a second marriage contracted after
conversion is void and can expose the husband to prosecution for bigamy.
Does this ruling mean the second marriage is automatically void?
Yes -- because the first marriage remains legally subsisting, the second marriage contracted while it
subsists does not have valid legal effect as a marriage, regardless of which personal law the husband
professes to follow at the time of the second marriage.
Has this judgment been reconsidered or overturned since 1995?
No -- it remains good law and was expressly reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Lily Thomas v. Union of
India (2000), which considered and rejected a challenge to the Sarla Mudgal principle.
