The appellants were accused of bigamy and abetment of bigamy under the Indian Penal Code.

The crux of the case was whether the prosecution successfully proved the second marriage, a crucial element for a bigamy conviction. The prosecution based its case on the acknowledgments of matrimonial union presented by the accused. The appellants contended that these acknowledgments did not constitute adequate evidence of the formal marriage ceremony.

Judgment:The Supreme Court rendered a verdict in favour of the appellants, asserting that in cases of bigamy, mere admission to a subsequent marriage does not suffice as substantive evidence. The court mandated that the prosecution must substantiate the essential rites and ceremonies associated with the second marriage.

The court's rationale underscored the imperative of maintaining a stringent standard of proof in instances of bigamy, recognizing the significant implications for an individual's liberty. Mere acknowledgment of a marital union should not warrant conviction without corroborating evidence of the requisite matrimonial formalities.