BARNES PEACOCK, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal from a decision of a Full Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. It was admitted by virtue of a special Order of Her Majesty in Council, whereby the Appellant had leave to appeal in the form of a special case upon the following questions, viz., 1st. Whether, under the Hindu law, as administered in the Bengal school, a widow who has once inherited the estate of a deceased husband is liable to forfeit that estate by reason of unchastity; and,
(2.) ND . Whether the forfeiture, if any, is barred by Act XXI. of 1850. 2. The appeal was admitted, on account of the importance of the questions submitted for determination and the great interest which the Hindu community take in it. The case came in the first instance upon special appeal before a Division Bench, consisting of Mr. Justice Bayley and Mr. Justice Dwarkanath Mitter, who were of opinion that the Defendant had, by reason of unchastity, forfeited her right in her husband's property, but in consequence of a contrary ruling of the High Court referred the two questions above mentioned to a Full Bench, with their remarks thereon.
(3.) THE Full Bench consisted of the Chief Justice and nine other Judges, and the majority held that the widow, having once inherited the estate, did not forfeit it by reason of her subsequent unchastity. Three of the Judges, however, viz., Mr. Justice Kemp, Mr. Justice Glover, and Mr. Justice Dwarkanath Mitter, dissented from the opinions expressed by the majority of the Court. The case is fully reported in the 13 Bengal Law Reports, p. 1.;