Justice Harpreet Kaur Jeewan also refused to accept the compromise between the couple, observing that same would be against public policy as both the man and the woman were already married to other people.
“The Court cannot stamp a live-in relationship inter se two married persons by granting them the concession of pre-arrest bail by way of accepting the present appeal. Polygamy is not permitted under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and permitting such a relationship by allowing the appeal and granting the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail to the appellant would give a wrong signal to the society, as such, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appellant cannot re-agitate the matter by filing the second appeal on the strength of the said compromise deed.” it said.
Pertinently, the first appeal for bail in the case also involving provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989 had been turned down by the Court on merits in February this year.
Source: Barandbench
