In SARLA MUDGAL v. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 1995 SC 1531, the Supreme Court held that:
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B.
1. In Sarla Mudgal v. UoI (1995), the Supreme Court addressed the issue of Hindu men converting to Islam to marry a second wife without divorcing the first.
2. The Court held: such conversion for the sole purpose of avoiding the prohibition of bigamy under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 is FRAUDULENT.
3. The second marriage is VOID and the man is liable for BIGAMY under Section 494 IPC.
4. The Court also reiterated the call for a UNIFORM CIVIL CODE under Article 44.
5. Followed in Lily Thomas v UoI (2000) — same principle reaffirmed.
6. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: International HR Treaties + Indian Constitutional Jurisprudence — Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 1531_
Related questions
The RIGHT TO FOOD under ICESCR Article 11 was elaborated in CESCR General Comment No. 12 (Article 13 ICESCR recognises the right to EDUCATION. Primary education shall be:Section 11A NHRC complaints are admitted on grounds of:The KAMPALA AMENDMENTS to the Rome Statute (2010) activated the CRIME OF AGGRESSION jurisdThe DOCTRINE OF EXTRA-TERRITORIAL APPLICATION of HUMAN RIGHTS treaties (per the ICJ Wall AThe PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE REALIZATION in ICESCR (Article 2(1)) is balanced by the doctrIn NUREMBERG TRIALS 1945-46, the International Military Tribunal articulated the principleArticle 41 ICCPR provides for INTER-STATE COMPLAINTS — a State Party may complain to the H