India's envoy to Cuba ends up with two wives; Supreme Court steps in to find a way out
The story began in 1994, when Changsan married Neikhol Changsan in a church under the Christian Marriage Act. Years later, he got a customary divorce from her through the Songpijan village elders in Assam's Dima Hasao district and married another woman.
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
But in 2022, the Gauhati High Court ruled that such a church marriage could not be dissolved by village elders. Only a proper court of law could annul such a marriage. So, legally, his first marriage still stood, meaning he had ended up with two wives.
When the matter reached the Supreme Court, a bench led by Justice Surya Kant clearly stated, 'We have absolutely no sympathy for the man.' The judges found the High Court's judgement sound and said Neikhol had suffered socially and mentally.
She appeared in court herself and said she raised her daughter alone, with little help. She accused Changsan of manipulating their daughter, now 29 and working in Bengaluru, to distance her from her mother.
Live Events
Neikhol pleaded with the court to protect her dignity, describing how Changsan quietly ended their marriage through tribal means and remarried without her knowledge.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing Changsan, said he had always paid for his daughter's needs. But the court wasn't convinced.
The bench noted that the daughter might play a key role in resolving the issue. They advised the ambassador to arrange for Neikhol to visit her daughter in Bengaluru, including flight tickets, a nearby stay, and an ad hoc payment of Rs 3 lakh.
Interestingly, the Kuki Inpi of Assam, the top tribal authority, confirmed that a church marriage cannot be undone using tribal law and also stressed that no couple can be forced to reunite.
The Supreme Court now wants to help Neikhol rebuild her life, asking her to think of what might bring peace going forward.
Inputs from TOI
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
a few seconds ago
- The Hindu
Madras High Court seeks State's response to PIL plea seeking to initiate process for empanelment of eligible IPS officers for T.N. DGP post
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Monday sought response of the State government to a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking the direction to the Central and the State governments to immediately initiate the process for empanelment of eligible IPS officers for the post of Director General of Police (DGP), Tamil Nadu. A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete sought response from the State on the procedure it would be adopting. The court also sought response regarding the Supreme Court guidelines in the Prakash Singh v. Union of lndia case, Supreme Court clarifications to the directions, Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) guidelines and the Single Window System. The court was hearing the PIL petition filed by K. Yasar Arafath of Paramakudi in Ramanathapuram district who sought appropriate directions regarding appointment of the Tamil Nadu DGP in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh v. Union of lndia judgment. The incumbent DGP Mr. Shankar Jiwal is set to retire on August 31. However, till date the State government has not taken steps to initiate the mandatory process of empaneling eligible IPS officers and forwarding the names to UPSC for preparation of a panel, as directed by the Supreme Court, he said. He claimed there were credible reports indicating the possibility of appointing an in-charge or acting DGP or seeking an extension for the current DGP without following the prescribed process. It amounts to contempt of the directions laid down by the Supreme Court in the Prakash Singh case, which require a merit based transparent selection of the DGP from a panel prepared by the UPSC in consultation with the State government, he said. The petitioner claimed in view of the upcoming Tamil Assembly Elections in 2026, the State government had planned to keep the Head of the Police Force as per their choice to get the support of the Police Department till the upcoming election. The Supreme Court has taken a serious note of the violation of its directions by several States, including the appointment of in-charge DGP and expressed grave concern over the continued non-compliance, he said. The petitioner sought a direction to restrain the State from appointing any officer as in-charge or acting DGP or granting extension to the retiring DGP, without following due process and UPSC panel recommendation pending disposal of the petition. The failure of the authorities to comply with the binding judicial directions undermines the rule of law and the independence and the professionalism of the police force, which has serious consequences for public administration and governance, he said. The court has ordered notice and posted the matter for hearing on August 11.
The Hindu
a few seconds ago
- The Hindu
Will not interfere in Madras High Court order against DMK membership drive, says Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene against an interim order of the Madras High Court restraining the ruling DMK in Tamil Nadu from sending OTP verification messages to mobile phone users during its ongoing Oraniyil Tamil Nadu membership drive. 'The court has to protect the citizens. Go back to the High Court. We are not inclined to interfere in the matter. Dismissed,' a Bench, headed by Justice P.S. Narasimha, said. The apex court did not budge even as senior advocate P. Wilson, appearing for the DMK, submitted that the party was not collecting Aadhaar details. On July 21, a Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete of the Madras High Court had issued an interim injunction to the limited extent (of OTP messages) till the issue of right to privacy and data protection were examined in detail. The High Court reasoned that the fundamental rights of the people were at stake. The High Court said that during the door-to-door membership drive, personal information, including mobile phone numbers, were obtained and OTP verification messages were sent to these. 'Data protection of the individuals is an essential element of Article 21 of the Constitution. In the absence of accountability and transparency in the data collected from individuals across the State, it is an issue which needs elaborate analysis,' the Bench had observed.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
a few seconds ago
- First Post
Colombia's former President Uribe petitions Supreme Court to lift house arrest after conviction
Colombia's former president Álvaro Uribe has petitioned the Supreme Court to lift his house arrest while he appeals a 12-year sentence for witness tampering and obstruction of justice. read more Colombia's former president Alvaro Uribe, the country's first previous leader to be convicted of a crime, petitioned the Supreme Court on Monday for his release while appealing his sentence of 12 years house jail. Uribe's conviction and punishment last Friday marked the end of his long career as one of Colombia's most contentious politicians. The 73-year-old, who is still popular and powerful among conservatives, conducted a rigorous military battle against drug traffickers and the FARC rebel group as president from 2002 to 2010. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Uribe was found guilty of tampering with witnesses in a separate inquiry investigating his suspected involvement with right-wing paramilitaries responsible for atrocities while fighting leftist guerrillas. He was also found guilty of impeding justice. At his sentencing the trial court judge declared him to be a flight risk and ordered him to be placed under house arrest at his home in the town of Rionegro, near Colombia's second city of Medellin. Uribe's lawyers petitioned the Supreme Court on Monday to set him free, assuring he had no intention of leaving his homeland. A law-and-order hardliner, Uribe was a close ally of the United States and retains ties to the American right. He claims his conviction is a political witch hunt by the administration of left-wing President Gustavo Petro. He has until August 13 to appeal his conviction. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has decried the case against Uribe, saying it represented 'the weaponization of Colombia's judicial branch by radical judges.'
