Supreme Court rejects foreign divorce defence while allowing bigamy proceedings

In N. Sridhar Reddy versus State of Andhra Pradesh, decided on 3 November 2026, the Supreme Court sustained bigamy proceedings against a husband who relied on a divorce granted by an English court. His first marriage had been performed in India under Hindu rites. The foreign decree rested on irretrievable breakdown, and the first wife had objected to the foreign court’s jurisdiction. The Court held that her participation could not, at this stage, be treated as unconditional acceptance of that jurisdiction. Proceedings against the parents and second wife were quashed; the husband’s prosecution was allowed to continue.

Facts to remember

• Decision date: 3 November 2026; case: N. Sridhar Reddy versus State of Andhra Pradesh.
• Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 governs conclusiveness of foreign judgments.
• The continuing prosecution concerns Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
• The ruling concerns scrutiny at the quashing stage, rather than a final finding of guilt.

Background

Section 13 sets conditions under which a foreign judgment is not conclusive between the relevant parties. Its exceptions include lack of competent jurisdiction, absence of a decision on the merits, proceedings contrary to natural justice, fraud and claims founded on a breach of Indian law. Recognition of a foreign matrimonial decree therefore requires more than showing that a court abroad issued it. The governing matrimonial law and the conditions for recognising the foreign adjudication remain relevant. This provides the civil procedure connection to the dispute, while the alleged second marriage supplies the criminal law dimension.

Why it matters for exams

For judiciary, APO, AIBE and UGC-NET Law, revise Family Law, private international law and criminal procedure. For CLAT, distinguish recognition of a foreign decree from the separate decision to permit a prosecution to proceed.