2010 Supreme(AP) 145

High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Samudrala Govindarajulu, J.
A. Subash Babu : Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh : Respondent
Crl. P No.2426 of 2005
Decided On : Feb 26, 2010

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, Section 482, Section 198(1) proviso (c), 155(4) – Quashing of proceedings – Indian Penal Code,1860 - Sections 494, 495, 420, 417,415, 498A – Cognizance of the offence - Petition is filed by the sole accused under Section for quashing proceedings on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class District relating to offences punishable under Sections - Previously petitioner filed Criminal Petition in this Court for the self same relief and it was withdrawn by the petitioner and the petition was accordingly dismissed by order by which the petitioner was given liberty to file a fresh petition if he is so advised - After few days thereof the petitioner came up with the present petition for quashing proceedings in the Criminal case - It is not known for what purpose it was previously withdrawn and on what new grounds the present petition is filed - It is alleged that the accused cheated the victim woman and her parents by stating that his first wife died after delivering two of bis children who are studying by staying in a hostel even though his first wife by name is very much alive and living with him at and that by making the said false and fraudulent representation, the accused married the victim woman at and that the accused collected total amount father of the victim woman towards hand loan on the false plea that he was constructing his own house at and that the accused further demanded from him and threatened the victim and her father with dire consequences by showing his licensed revolver and that several times the accused tried to snatch away gold ornaments from the victims person by threatening her with dire consequences and that the accused demanded to part with her gold ornaments together with cash from her parents and that when his additional demand was not fulfilled the accused threatened the victim and her father by saying that he would wipe out evidence of his marriage with the victim at by destroying all photographs and negatives and would walk out of their house petitioner/accused was then working as Sub-inspector of Police in Intelligence Wing of the Police Department at Hyderabad - Truth or otherwise of all allegations in the charge-sheet as well as in First Information Report have to be adjudged by the trial Court after both the parties leading their oral and documentary evidence during trial before the lower Court – Held, It is thirdly contended by the petitioners Counsel that marriage of the accused with the victim in this case who is stated to be second wife of the accused, is void ab initio she cannot claim herself to be a legally wedded wife who can invoke offence punishable under Section Supreme it was held by the Supreme Court that when marriage of the accused with the deceased was during subsistence of valid marriage between the accused and his first wife, was null and void, conviction of the accused for offence punishable under Section IPC for harassing the deceased who committed suicide is not sustainable in law question as to who would be covered by the expression husband for attracting Section does present problems - Etymologically in terms of the definition of as given in the various Law Lexicons and dictionaries - existence of a valid marriage may appear to be a sine quo non for applying a penal provision. Admittedly, the victim in this case is second wife of the petitioner who is said to have married her by suppressing the fact of his first wife living - Prima facie marriage between the petitioner and the second respondent is void and it cannot be said that the alleged harassment or cruelty meted out by the petitioner towards her attracts penal provision under Section - It is lastly contended by the petitioners Counsel that there is no property involved in this case and that therefore, penal provisions under Sections IPC have no application said contention does not stand to scrutiny because definition of cheating contained under Section 415 IPC is attracted in case of damage or harm to the person in body mind reputation or property – Petition is partly dismissed.