Supreme Court Refuses to Quash Bigamy Case Against Husband Who Remarried After UK Divorce, Quashes Proceedings Against Parents and Second Wife

Case Name — N. Sridhar Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh through Secretary and Others
Date of Judgment — 3 November 2026
Citation — 2026 INSC 1191
Bench — Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar

Held. The Supreme Court held that the husband could not rely on the UK divorce decree to have the bigamy proceedings quashed under Section 482 CrPC. The decree was granted on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, which the Hindu Marriage Act does not recognise as a statutory ground for divorce. Applying Section 13 CPC and Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi, the Court also found that the first wife’s participation in the English proceedings, where she objected to jurisdiction, could not at the quashing stage be treated as voluntary submission to that court. The husband’s British citizenship and the fact that he remarried in England did not warrant quashing the case under Section 494 IPC.

Summary. N. Sridhar Reddy married N. Geetha Prasanthi in Andhra Pradesh under Hindu rites. After his divorce petition in India was dismissed and he withdrew his appeal, he obtained a divorce decree from the Cambridge County Court and married Geetha Inturi in England. His first wife lodged a complaint alleging bigamy and criminal conspiracy. The Supreme Court examined the allegations against each accused separately. It found no prima facie material showing that the husband’s parents had agreed to or actively facilitated the alleged bigamy, or that Geetha Inturi knowingly participated while aware that the first marriage subsisted.

Decision. The Supreme Court dismissed the husband’s appeal, allowing the prosecution under Section 494 IPC to proceed against him.