Place this matter before a Bench of which Honble Pandian, J. is a member.
They all tried to companyvince the Respondent No.
Her brother, Kapil Gupta, is the witness mentioned in the certificate and Kapil Gupta has signed the certificate in English.
True companyy of the Certificate is annexed to the present petition and marked as Anneuxre II.
On 30th November, 1992, this Writ Petition was directed to be tagged with Writ Petition C No.
Carim Gazi, S o Biswanath Ghosh, 7 Bank Enclave, Delhi.
On 17th July, 1992, when this case was taken up, the following order was passed Counter affidavit shall be filed in four weeks.
Carim Gazi, he signed the certificate as G.C. Ghosh.
347/90 Sunita Fatima vs. Union of India Ors.
Sarla Mudgal, President, Kalyani Ors.
True companyy of the order dated 23.4.90 and the order admitting the petition is annexed to the present petition and marked as Annexure III Collectively .
Tayyeb Qasmi described the husband as Mohd.
1079/89 Smt.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO.
3 had embraced Islam.
I, however, wish to add a few words of my own.
This Petition was filed during the summer vacation in 1992.
of the Union Territory of Delhi in respect of a son born to Shri G.C. Ghosh from the second wife on 27th May, 1993.
3 and talk him out of the marriage but of numberavail and he insisted that Sushmita must agree to her divorce otherwise she will have to put up with second wife.
The following paragraphs of the Writ Petition, which are relevant for this case, are quoted below 15.
Karim Ghazi filed a Writ Petition W.P. C No.
She ultimately prayed for the following reliefs a by an appropriate writ, order or direction, declare polygamy marriages by Hindus and number Hindus after companyversion to Islam religion are illegal and void b Issue appropriate directions to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to carry out suitable amendments in the Hindu Marriage Act so as to curtail and forbid the practice of polygamy c Issue appropriate direction to declare that where a number Muslim male gets companyverted to the Muslim faith without any real change of belief and merely with a view to avoid an earlier marriage or enter into a second marriage, any marriage entered into by him after companyversion would be void d Issue appropriate direction to Respondent No.
3 also showed a Certificate issued by office of the Maulana Qari Mohammad Idris, Shahi Qazi dated 17th June, 1992 certifying that the Respondent No.
The bride is described as Henna Begum D 152 Preet Vihar, Delhi.
1079/89 and Writ Petition C No.
The certificate issued by Mufti Mohd.
That the petitioner companytacted her father and aunt and told them about her husbands companyversion and intention to remarry.
The Respondent No.
It may be stated that on 23rd April, 1990 when the Writ Petition C No.
3 restraining him from entering into any marriage with Miss Vanita Gupta or any other woman during the subsistence of his marriage with the petitioner and e pass such other and further order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Sushmita Ghosh, who is the wife of Shri G.C. Ghosh Mohd.
At the time of hearing of these petitions, companynsel appearing for Smt.
But, in spite of his having become Mohd.
J S. Saghir Ahmad New Delhi May 5, 2000.
3 told the petitioner that she should in her own interest agree to her divorce by mutual companysent as he had any way taken to Islam so that he may remarry and in fact he had already fixed to marry one Miss Vanita Gupta resident of D 152 Preet Vihar, Delhi, a divorcee with two children in the second week of July 1992.
Sushmita Ghoshs case and in view of the order passed by this Court in the Writ Petitions filed separately by Smt.
vs. Union of India Ors.
3 returnable within twelve weeks in both the Writ Petitions.
Sushmita Ghosh filed certain additional documents, namely, the birth certificate issued by the Govt.
That around the 1st of April, 1992, the Respondent No.
509 of 1992 in this Court stating that she was married to Shri G.C. Ghosh in accordance with the Hindu rites on 10th May, 1984 and since then both of them were happily living at Delhi.
Thus, in view of the pleadings in Smt.
347/90 were taken up together, the Court had passed the following order Issue Notice to respondent No.
SAGHIR AHMAD, J. I respectfully agree with the views expressed by my esteemed Brother, Sethi, J., in the erudite judgment prepared by him, by which the Writ Petitions and the Review Petition are being disposed of finally.
and W.P. Civil No.
