RAM CHANDRA BHAGATversusSTATE OF JHARKHAND

                       [2012] 10 S.C.R. 1050


A                    RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT
                                  V.
                      STATE OF JHARKHAND
                 (Criminal Appeal No. 439 of 2006)

                        NOVEMBER 9, 2012
B
     [R.M. LODHA, ANIL R. DAVE AND SUDHANSU JYOTI
                   MUKHOPADHYAY, JJ.]

         Penal Code, 1860 - s. 493 - Prosecution under -
· C Accused and complainant living as husband and wife for nine
    years - Having two children out of this relation - Forms
    regarding marriage registration signed by accused as well as
    complainant - In the voter's list complainant mentioned as wife
    of the accused - The persons related to the complainant and
  o the accused also made to believe that the complainant was
    wife of the accused - Courts below convicted the accused u/
    s. 493 - On appeal to Supreme Court, difference of opinion
    between the two Judges of Division Bench as regards
    applicability of s. 493 - Matter referred to Bench of Three
  E Judges - Held: There is sufficient evidence to show that the
    accused deceived the complainant which resulted in belief in
    the mind of the complainant that she was lawfully married to
    the accused, and made her cohabit with him - Thus, th~
    ingredients of Section 493 have been fully established.
F       Words and Phrases - 'Deceit' - Meaning of, in the
    context of s.493 /PC.

      As per the prosecution, appellant-accused
  developed intimate relationship with the complainant. The
G accused made the complainant believe that she had
  become his wife, and they stayed together as husband
  and wife for 9 years. They also had two children o_ut of
  this relation. Thereafter, the accused turned the
  complainant out of the house. On the complaint, the
H                            1050
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1051

accused was prosecuted. The courts below convicted           A
the accused u/s. 493 IPC.

     In appeal, the case was decided by Division Bench.
One of the Judges was of the view that no offence u/s.
493 IPC was committed. The other Judge was of the view       8
that offence u/s. 493 IPC was made out. In view of the
difference of opinion, the case was referred to Three
Judges Bench.

     Dismissing the appeal, the Court
                                                             c
    HELD:
Per Anil R. Dave, J. (for himself and Sudhanshu Jyoti
Mukhopadhyay, J.):

     1. Upon perusal of Section 493 IPC, to establish that   D
a person has committed an offence u/s. 493 IPC, it must
be established that a person had deceitfully induced a
belief to 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        E
that she was lawfully married to him and there should be
cohabitation or sexual intercourse as a result of the
deception. [Para 9] [1056-G-H; 1057-A]

    2.1. The accused-appellant had got a form, with
                                                             F
regard to marriage registration, signed by the
complainant. The form was signed by the accused 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    G
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               H
    1052   SUPREME COURT REPORTS              (2012] 10 S.C.R.


A 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
B at the instance of the accused-appellant, the complainant
  was made to believe that she was a lawfully married wife
  of the accused-appellant. [Para 12] [1057-G-H; 1058-A-C]

       2.2. As a result of the afore-stated deceitful act of the
C accused-appellant, the complainant started residing with
  him as she believed that she had lawfully married the
  accused-appellant. 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
D 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. [Para 13] [1058-D-F]
E
      2.3. Thus, upon perusal of the evidence, 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
F she was a lawfully married wife of the accused-appellant,
  though she was not, and thereafter, there was
  cohabitation and sexual intercourse as a result of the
  deception. [Paras 11 and 15] [1057-F; 1058-G]

    Per R.M. Lodha, J. (Concurring):
G
      1.1. The essence of an offence u/s. 493 IPC is,
  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
H then make her cohabit with him. [Para 2] [1059-G]
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1053


     1.2. 'Deceit', in the law, has a broad significance. Any    A
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                  B
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 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      c
and includes any declaration that misleads another or
causes him to believe what is false. [Para 6) [1060-F-H;
1061-A]

     Stroud's Judicial Dictionary [Fifth Edition]; Black's Law
Dictionary[Eighth Edition]; Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha          D
Aiyar [2nd Edition,Reprint 2000) - referred to.

      1.3. 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 E
cohabit with him in the belief that she is lawfully married
to him is what constitutes an offence under Section 493
IPC. 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 F
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 G
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 H
493 IPC. [Para 6) [1061-8-E]
    1054    SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2012] 10 S.C.R.

A       2. 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
B by the accused/appellant for information to the Special
  Marriage Officer, regarding his marriage with the victim
  woman, (iv) an agreement (Exhibit 2) was executed for
  marriage certificate wherein the accused admitted that he
  was living a normal family life as a married couple with
c the complainant for the last one year and she was his
  wife, (v) voters' list (Exhibit 6) of the assembly electoral
  list 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
0
  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
E him 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. [Para 9] [1062-G-H; 1063-A-D] .

        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
F No. 439 of 2006.

        From the Judgment & Order dated 8.9.2005 of the High
    Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in Cr. Rev.No. 788 of 2005.

      Deba Prasad Mukherjee, Ratan Kumar Choudhury,
G Brahmajeet Mishra, Annwesha Deb, Jyotika Kalra for the
  Appearing Parties.

        The Judgments of the Court was delivered by

        ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Being aggrieved by an order dated
H
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND 1055
            [ANIL R. DAVE, J.]

8th September, 2005 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand             A
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
impugned order, the appellant was sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay         B
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         C
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             D
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             E
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 complainant and upon
developing intimate relationship with her, by his actions he
made the complainant to believe that she had become the wife          F
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.
                                                                      G
     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)             H
    1056    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2012] 10 S.C.R.


A 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
B 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
C 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.
D
         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
E        inducing a belief of lawful marriage - Every man who by
         deceit caus.es any woman who is not lawfully married to
         him to believe that she is lawfully married to him and to
         cohabit or have sexual intercourse with him in that belief,
         shall be punished with imprisonment of either description
F        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
G 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
H accused must induce a woman, who is not lawfully married to
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1057
            [ANIL R. DAVE, J.)
him, to believe that he is married to her and as a result of the    A
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.

     10. One of the learned judges was of the view that no          8
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 compiainant for about nine   C
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        D
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
~~                                                                  E
      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     F
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               G
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     H
    1058     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                [2012] 10 S.C.R.


A duly signed by both the persons had been exhibited and the
  signature of the appellant had 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
B 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
c 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
D 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 and
  the afore-stated fact was also reflected in the voters' list. In the
E 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
F 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
G 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-
H appellant that she was lawfully married to the accused-
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1059


appellant. The complainant- had also cohabited with the               A
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
                                                                      8
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.               C
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.

     18. In these circumstances, we dismiss the appeal. The           D
bail bonds shall stand cancelled and the accused-appellant is
directed to surrender to undergo the remaining period of
sentence with immediate effect.

      R.M. LODHA, J. 1. I have had the benefit of going through       E
the judgment;p1oposed 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          F
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          G
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.

    3. Stroud's Judicial Dictionary [Fifth Edition] explains          H
    1060    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    (2012] 10 S.C.R.


A       "'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
B       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
c                                                  '
        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 ...... ."
D
        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,
E       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'.
F
        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
G 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
  personal act and is intermediate when compared with fraud.
  Deceit is sort of a trick or contrivance to defraud another. It is
H an attempt to deceive and includes any declaration that
RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1061
             [R.M. LODHA, J.]

misleads another or causes him to believe what is false. If a        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              B
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          c
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         0
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
                                                                     E
an offence under Section 493 IPC.

     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       F
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. w~s of the view that for an offence under
Section 493 there should be an inducement of belief in the           G
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 :                              H
    1062    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                (2012] 10 S.C.R.

A       "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
B       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
c       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
D
        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
E       of the provision for which it has been incorporated in the
        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. n
F
         8. ·We find ourselves in complete agreement with the
    position stated above.
       9. The prosecution has been able to prove - (i) the
G 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
H regarding his marriage with the victim woman on 13.4.1982,
 RAM CHANDRA BHAGAT v. STATE OF JHARKHAND1063
              [R.M. LODHA, J.]
(iv) an agreement (Exhibit 2) was executed for marriage                A
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)        B
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         c
complainant causing a false belief of existence of lawful
marriage and making her cohabit with him in that belief. Thus,
the ingredients of Section 493 IPC have been fully established
by the prosecution. The offence und~r the said Section is made
out beyond any reasonable doubt.
                                                                       D
     10. In view of the above, the appeal is liable to be
·dismissed and is dismissed.
K.K.T.                                        Appeal dismissed.