According to the Court, it would not be termed bigamy if a couple—including, in this case, a man who is previously married to another—lives together as husband and wife despite not having celebrated a legal marriage.

The Rajasthan High Court has noted that living with a partner without solemnizing a second marriage with that spouse does not constitute the crime of bigamy.

When handling a case in which a married man was accused of bigamy by his wife because he was living with another lady, Justice Kuldeep Mathur made the statement.

However, the judge made clear that unless a second marriage is consummated while the first is still in effect, there would be no offense covered under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (offence of marrying twice during lifetime of husband or wife/bigamy).

According to the Court, a married person is not guilty of bigamy just because they cohabitate with someone else; that would only happen if the married person gets married again.

"It is established law that anyone who solemnizes a marriage during the lifetime of either the husband or the wife, as the case may be, would be guilty of the offence punishable under Section 494 IPC.

If a man and a woman have not completed a lawful marriage in line with the current legislation, their cohabitation as husband and wife will not be regarded as an offense punishable under Section 494 IPC," the May 7.

In this case, the petitioner, a male, was accused of bigamy, cruelty, and other IPC offenses after his wife filed a complaint.

After that, he petitioned the High Court to overturn the criminal charges against him that were still ongoing in a trial court.

The petitioner's attorney argued that there was no claim that the petitioner had performed necessary religious rites to formally consummate a second marriage with a different woman.

The complainant, who is the wife, had also declared that her husband was single.

The attorney went on to say that the wife's only intention in filing the bigamy case against the husband was to embarrass and annoy him more than twenty years after the alleged offense.

The wife's attorney refuted the husband's assertions, stating that he would still be guilty of bigamy even if it were assumed that her husband was maintaining a relationship with another woman in accordance with Nata marriage customs—a practice that permits two people to enter into a relationship akin to marriage without any legal, religious, or social obligations by divorcing or in any other way.

Nonetheless, the petitioner's second marriage to a different woman was not supported by any evidence, the court noted.

"There is nothing on record to establish as to whether the same (Nata marriage) was done by following the marriage ceremonies required by the personal law governing the parties or by following the essential ceremonies for a Nata marriage," the Court stated.

According to the Court, bigamy was not proven to be a crime. As a result, the Court dismissed and annulled the criminal cases against the accused man that were still ongoing before the trial court.

Relatedly, the Punjab and Haryana High Court had a differing opinion, stating that an individual who leads “a lustful and adulterous” life without first obtaining a divorce from a previous spouse could be prosecuted for bigamy.

More recently, the Delhi High Court held that people are not automatically exempt from marrying someone else while their previous marriage is still going strong just because there isn't a law that criminalizes adultery.