Page 1

                                           REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL     APPEAL     NO.439     OF     2006   

RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT .....APPELLANT.

        VERSUS

STATE OF  JHARKHAND        ....RESPONDENT.

J     U     D     G     M     E     N     T   

ANIL     R.     DAVE,     J.   

1) Being aggrieved by an order dated 8th September,  

2005 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in  

Criminal Revision No.788 of 2005, whereby the order of  

conviction of the appellant was confirmed by the High Court,  

the appellant has filed this appeal.  By virtue of the  

1

Page 2

impugned order, the appellant was sentenced to undergo  

rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to  

pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo rigorous  

imprisonment for a period of two months has been  

confirmed.

2) This appeal was initially heard by this court but after  

hearing the appeal, one of the learned judges was of the  

view that the appellant could not have been convicted for  

committing an offence under Section 493 of the Indian Penal  

Code (for short ‘the IPC’), whereas the said view was not  

accepted by another learned judge.  

3) In the afore-stated circumstances, the appeal was  

placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice, who referred it to a  

three-judge Bench and, therefore, it had been placed before  

us.

4) As the facts have been duly discussed by both the  

learned judges in their respective orders, we narrate the  

same in a nutshell.  According to the case of the  

prosecution, the appellant had acquaintance with the  

2

Page 3

complainant and upon developing intimate relationship with  

her, by his actions he made the complainant to believe that  

she had become the wife of the appellant herein and thereby  

they had stayed together for nine years as husband and wife  

and during that period the complainant had given birth to  

two children  ─ a son and a daughter.  Thereafter, the  

allegation is that the appellant had turned the complainant  

out of his house.

5) In the afore-stated circumstances, a complaint  

was filed by the complainant and in pursuance of the said  

complaint the appellant was prosecuted.  After a full-fledged  

trial, the appellant was convicted by an order dated 20th  

December, 2003 passed in G.R. Case No.27 of 1992  

(Lohardaga P.S. case No.12/92) by the Judicial Magistrate  

First Class, Lohardaga.  An appeal filed against the order of  

conviction, being Criminal Appeal No.1 of 2004, was  

dismissed by the learned Additional District and Sessions  

Judge, Lohardage.  Being aggrieved by the order of  

dismissal of the appeal, the appellant had filed Criminal  

3

Page 4

Revision No.788/2005 before the High Court of Jharkhand at  

Ranchi and the same was rejected by an order dated 8th  

September, 2005, which lead to the filing of this appeal.

6) We heard the learned counsel and also  

meticulously perused the impugned judgments and the  

record pertaining to the case.

7) Before dealing with the case in hand, let us see as  

to how and why the learned judges of this Court had come  

to  different conclusions.

8) As we are concerned with the provisions of  

Section 493 of the IPC, it would be just and proper to look at  

the said section before we deal with the subject.

“Section 493:  Cohabitation caused by a man  

deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful  

marriage – Every man who by deceit causes  

any woman who is not lawfully married to  

him to believe that she is lawfully married to  

4

Page 5

him and to cohabit or have sexual  

intercourse with him in that belief, shall be  

punished with imprisonment of either  

description for a term which may extend to  

ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

9) Upon perusal of Section 493 of the IPC, to  

establish that a person has committed an offence under the  

said Section, it must be established that a person had  

deceitfully induced a belief to a woman, who is not lawfully  

married to him, that she is a lawfully married wife of that  

person and thereupon she should cohabit or should have  

had sexual intercourse with that person.  Looking at the  

afore-stated section, it is clear that the accused must induce  

a woman, who is not lawfully married to him, to believe that  

he is married to her and as a result of the afore-stated  

representation, the woman should believe that she was  

lawfully married to him and there should be cohabitation or  

sexual intercourse as a result of the deception.  

5

Page 6

10) One of the learned judges was of the view that no  

deception was practised by the appellant and, therefore, no  

offence under the provisions of Section 493 of the IPC had  

been committed.  It was the view of the learned judge that  

though the appellant had acted in an immoral manner which  

might not be approved by the society but he had not  

committed any offence in the eyes of law by staying with the  

complainant for about nine years.  On the other hand, on  

appreciation of the evidence, another learned judge had  

confirmed the concurrent findings of the courts below and  

had come to the conclusion that the appellant had in fact  

practised deception, which led the complainant woman to  

believe that she was a lawfully married wife of the appellant  

though in reality she was not a lawfully married wife of the  

appellant and thereupon she had cohabited with the  

appellant.  In these circumstances, another learned judge  

wanted to confirm the concurrent findings of the courts  

below.

6

Page 7

11) Upon perusal of the evidence, we also are of the  

view, like the courts below that the appellant had practised  

deception and as a result thereof the complainant believed  

that she was a lawfully married wife of the accused and  

thereafter there was cohabitation and sexual intercourse as  

a result of the deception.

12) Upon perusal of the evidence we find that upon  

being acquainted with the complainant, the accused had  

developed a close relationship with the complainant.  He  

used to visit the complainant from time to time and he had  

promised the complainant to marry her.  Upon perusal of the  

evidence, we further find that the accused-appellant had got  

a form, with regard to marriage registration, signed by the  

complainant.  The form was signed by the accused-appellant  

and he also induced the complainant to sign the form so as  

to get married.  The form duly signed by both the persons  

had been exhibited and the signature of the appellant had  

7

Page 8

been identified.  The afore-stated fact made the complainant  

to believe that the accused-appellant had married her and,  

therefore, she had started residing with him as his wife.  In  

fact, the appellant did not marry the complainant.  The  

persons related to the complainant and the accused were  

also made to believe that the complainant was the wife of  

the appellant, though rituals necessary for Hindu marriage  

had never been performed.  It is an admitted fact that no  

marriage had taken place between the complainant and the  

appellant but only on the basis of the documents signed by  

the complainant at the instance of the accused-appellant,  

the complainant was made to believe that she was a lawfully  

married wife of the accused-appellant.

13) As a result of the afore-stated deceitful act of the  

accused-appellant, the complainant started residing with him  

as she believed that she had lawfully married the accused-

appellant.  There is sufficient evidence on record to show  

that the complainant had resided with the accused-appellant  

8

Page 9

and the afore-stated fact was also reflected in the voters’  

list.  In the voters’  list the name of the complainant was  

shown as the wife of the appellant.  As a result of the  

cohabitation, the complainant had given birth to two  

children.  The accused-appellant had acknowledged the fact  

that the said two children were his children.  Several  

ceremonies in relation to the birth of the children had also  

been performed by the accused-appellant.

15) Thus, upon perusal of the evidence, we find that  

there was sufficient evidence to the effect that the accused-

appellant has deceived the complainant, which ultimately  

resulted into a belief in the mind of the complainant that she  

was a lawfully married wife of the accused-appellant, though  

she was not.

16) The afore-stated evidence which has been found  

by all the courts below is sufficient to show that the  

complainant was made to believe by the deceitful act of the  

accused-appellant that she was lawfully married to the  

9

Page 10

accused-appellant.  The complainant had also cohabited with  

the appellant and had sexual intercourse with the accused-

appellant and thereby she had given birth to two children  

also.

17) In the afore-stated set of circumstances, when  

there is ample evidence to the effect that only on the  

deceitful representation of the accused-appellant the  

complainant believed herself to be a lawfully married wife of  

the accused-appellant and as she had cohabited with the  

accused-appellant, there cannot be any doubt with regard to  

commission of an offence under the provisions of Section  

493 of the IPC. Moreover, we do not find any error  

committed by the courts below in coming to the final  

conclusion with regard to commission of the offence by the  

appellant and, therefore, we confirm the order passed by the  

High Court.  

10

Page 11

18) In these circumstances, we dismiss the appeal.  

The bail bonds shall stand cancelled and the accused-

appellant is directed to surrender to undergo the remaining  

period of sentence with immediate effect.  

  ..................................................J.

                             (ANIL R. DAVE)

………….......................................J.                             (SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHYAY)

New Delhi November 09, 2012

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL     APPEAL     NO.     439     OF     2006   

11

Page 12

Ram Chandra Bhagat …. Appellant

Versus

State of Jharkhand                ….Respondent

JUDGMENT

R.M.     Lodha,     J.      

I have had the benefit of going through the judgment proposed  

by my esteemed brother Anil R. Dave, J. I entirely agree with his view,  

however, I wish to add few lines of my own.

2. Section 493 IPC does not need to be reproduced by me as the  

text of Section 493  has already been quoted in the lead judgment.  When  

a man deceitfully induces a woman to have sexual intercourse with him  

causing her to believe that she is lawfully married to him, such man  

commits an offence under Section 493 IPC. The essence of an offence  

under Section 493 IPC is, therefore, practice of deception by a man on a  

woman as a consequence of which the woman is led to believe that she is  

lawfully married to him although she is not and then make her cohabit with  

him.  

12

Page 13

3. Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary [Fifth Edition] explains ‘deceit’  as  

follows:

“‘Deceit, ’  deceptio, fraus, dolus, is a subtle, wily shift or  device, having no other name; hereto may be drawn all  manner of craft, subtilly, guile, fraud, wilinesse, slight,  cunning, covin, collusion, practice, and offence used to  deceive another man by any means, which hath none other  proper or particular name but offence”.

4. Black’s Law Dictionary [Eighth Edition] explains ‘deceit’ thus :

“The act of intentionally giving a false impression the˂  juror’s  deceit led the lawyer to believe that she was not biased .˃   2.  A false statement of fact made by a person knowingly or  recklessly (i.e., not caring whether it is true or false) with the  intent that someone else will act upon it…….”

5. In the Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha Aiyar [2nd Edition,  

Reprint 2000], ‘deceit’ is described as follows :

“Fraud; false representation made with intent to deceive;  ‘Deceit, ‘deception of fraud’  is a subtle, wily shift or device,  having no other name, In this may be included all manner of  craft, subtlety, guile, fraud, wiliness, slight, cunning, covin,  collusion, practice and offence used to deceive another may  by any means, which hath none other proper or particular  name but offence’.   

6. ‘Deceit’, in the law, has a broad significance.  Any device or  

false representation by which one man misleads another to his injury and  

fraudulent misrepresentations by which one man deceives another to the  

injury of the latter, are deceit.  Deceit   is a false statement of fact made by  

a person knowingly or recklessly with intent that it shall be acted upon by  

another who does act upon it and thereby suffers an injury. It is always a  

13

Page 14

personal act and is intermediate  when compared with fraud. Deceit is sort  

of a trick or contrivance to defraud another. It is an attempt to deceive and  

includes any declaration that misleads another or causes him to believe  

what is false. If a woman is induced to change her status from that of an  

unmarried to that of a married woman with all the duties and obligations  

pertaining to the changed relationship and that result is accomplished by  

deceit,  such woman  within the law can be said to have been deceived  

and the offence under Section 493 IPC is brought home. Inducement by a  

person deceitfully to a woman to change her status from unmarried woman  

to a lawfully married woman and on that inducement making her cohabit  

with him in the  belief that she is lawfully married to him is what constitutes  

an offence under Section 493.  The victim woman  has been induced to do  

that which, but for the false practice, she would not have done and has  

been led to change her social and domestic status.  The ingredients of  

Section 493 can be said to be fully satisfied when it is proved – (a) deceit  

causing  a false belief of  existence of a lawful marriage and (b)  

cohabitation or sexual intercourse with the person causing such belief. It is  

not necessary to establish the factum of marriage according to personal  

law but the proof of inducement by a man deceitfully to a woman to change  

her status from that of an unmarried to that of a lawful married woman and  

then make that woman cohabit with him establishes an offence under  

Section 493 IPC.   

14

Page 15

7. When the criminal appeal came up for hearing before a two-

Judge Bench, the Judges differed in their views.  One of the Judges,  

Markandey Katju, J., held that Section 493 IPC was not attracted as there  

was no proof of lawful marriage although the appellant lived with the  

complainant for nine years and had two children by her.  On the other  

hand, the other Judge, Gyan Sudha Misra, J. was of the view that for an  

offence under Section 493  there should be an inducement of belief in the  

woman that she was lawfully married to the accused and the inducement  

of belief of a lawful marriage cannot be interpreted so as to mean or infer  

that the marriage necessarily had to be in accordance with any custom or  

ritual or under Special Marriage Act. She observed as follows :

“9. Section 493 IPC in my opinion do not presuppose a  marriage between the accused and the victim necessarily  by following a ritual or marriage by customary ceremony.  What has been clearly laid down and emphasized is that  there should be an inducement of belief in the woman that  she is lawfully married to the accused/appellant and the  inducement of belief of a lawful marriage cannot be  interpreted so as to mean or infer that the marriage  necessarily had to be in accordance with any custom or  ritual or under Special Marriage Act. If the evidence on  record indicate inducement of a belief in any manner in the  woman which cannot possibly be enlisted but from which it  can reasonably be inferred by ordinary prudence that she  is a lawfully married wife of the man accused of an offence  under Section 493 IPC, the same will have to be treated  as sufficient material to bring home the guilt under Section  493 IPC.  Interpretation of the Section in any other manner  including an assertion that the marriage should have been  performed by customary rituals or in similar manner only in  order to establish that a belief  of marriage had been  induced, is bound to frustrate the very object and purpose  of the provision for which it has been incorporated in the  

15

Page 16

Indian Penal Code which is clearly to prevent the deceitful  act of a man inducing the  belief of a lawful marriage for  the purpose of cohabitation merely to satisfy his lust for  sexual pleasure.”

8.     We find ourselves in complete agreement with the position  

stated above.  

9. The prosecution has been able to prove –  (i) the appellant  

and the victim woman had been living for a period of nine years like a  

husband and wife, (ii) the accused and the victim woman had two children  

from that relationship, (iii) an  application (Exhibit 3) was made by the  

accused/appellant for information to the Special Marriage Officer,  

Lohardaga regarding his marriage with the victim woman on 13.4.1982, (iv)  

an agreement (Exhibit 2) was executed for marriage certificate on 4.6.1982  

wherein the accused admitted that he was living a normal family life as a  

married couple with Sunita Kumari (complainant) for the last one year and  

Sunita Kumari was his wife, (v) voters’  list (Exhibit 6) of the assembly  

electoral list of Lohardaga for the year 1984; Voters’  List (Exhibit 6/1) for  

the year 1988 and another Voters’  List (Exhibit 6/2) for the year 1993  

indicated that victim woman was shown as wife of the accused, (vi)  the  

appellant and the victim lived together as a normal couple at different  

places of posting in course of service and  

(vii) the appellant had practiced deception on the complainant causing a  

false belief of existence of lawful marriage and making her cohabit with him  

16

Page 17

in that belief.  Thus, the ingredients of Section 493 IPC have been fully  

established by the prosecution.  The offence under the said Section is  

made out beyond any reasonable doubt.

10. In view of the above, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and  

is dismissed.

                                                                               …………………… ..J.                (R.M. Lodha)

NEW DELHI NOVEMBER 9, 2012.     

17