The court emphasized that when the complainant has access to evidence and witnesses, further police investigation may not be necessary. However, in cases of specific offences like bigamy, the court may direct the registration of an FIR despite the complainant's access to evidence.

JUDGMENT

Anu Malhotra, J. - The petitioner vide the present petition seeks the setting aside of the order dated 16.8.2019 of the Court of the District & Sessions Judge, Dwarka, in Crl.Rev.P. No. 27/2019, vide which order the Crl.Rev.P. 27/2019 filed by the petitioner herein against the order dated 13.2.2019 of the Court of the learned Trial Court dismissing the application under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C., 1973, filed by the petitioner as complainant in Ct.Cases No. 28285/2018 was declined.

2. Vide order dated 13.2.2019, the learned Trial Court in CT No. 28285/2019 observed to the effect:

'The facts in brief are that on complainant and accused no.1 got married on 02.10.2006 as per Sikh rites at Gurudwara and out of the wedlock, two daughters were born aged 7 years and 11 years. It is stated that accused no.1 met accused no.2 in the company Paras Buildtech where both were working together and on 12.10.2015, accused no.1 joined Elan Ltd. Company in Gurgaon and represented to the complainant that his company had offered him company accommodation in Gurgaon and therefore, accused no.1 has to shift in the said accommodation. Accused no.1 conveyed to the complainant clearly that he would now come home only once a week. It is further stated that complainant did not agree to the above peculiar arrangement but accused nos.1 did not pay any heed to it and shifted to the said accommodation and thereafter, on one day, the Complainant saw some questionable and objectionable photographs and messages on mobile of accused no.1 with accused no.2 and found that accused no.1 was having extra marital affair with accused no.2. It is further stated that on 19.12.2015, Complainant lodged a complaint with 1091 and caught accused persons red handed and accused no.1 confessed that he was in fact having an extra marital affair with accused no.2 but at that moment, accused no.1 and 2 pretended to be apologetic for his actions and tendered apology in writing. It is further stated that despite above stated assurances, accused persons resumed cohabiting together and threatened the Complainant with dire consequences in case in case she approaches the police again. The accused persons threatened to intimidating the complainant in order to force her to give divorce to accused no.1. Thereafter, Complainant received a legal notice from accused no.1 in January 2016 and accused no.1 filed a divorce petition before District court, Tis Hazari. That on 16.02.2016, accused no.1 visited the Complainant with his mother and both of them assaulted the Complainant physically and dragged their daughters in between and hurled abuses at them. Thereafter, Complainant filed a complaint against accused no.1 u/s 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at District court, Dwarka. It is further stated that soon thereafter, accused no.1 again approached Complainant and begged her to forgive him and started visiting Complainant and their daughters twice and thrice a week in order to play fraud so that Complainant get convinced that everything is fine and withdrew the above complaint filed against accused no.1 and thereafter, in October 2016, Complainant withdrew the Domestic Violence complaint. It is further stated that since accused no.1 had started cohabiting with Complainant , accused no.2 filed a complaint against accused no.1 on 27.11.2016 at PS Sector 56 Gurgaon and an FIR was registered against accused no.1 bearing FIR no.362/16. It is further stated that accused no.1 confessed on 27.11.2016 that accused no.1 had got married to accused nos.2 on 18.10.2015 itself and marriage had been solemnised as per Sikh Rites at Gururdwara at Sector-35, Faridabad. It is further stated that on 28.11.2016, accused no.1 was released on bail and after being released, under the pretext of convincing accused no.1 to withdraw her case, accused no.1 started visiting accused no.2 again; it is further stated that accused no.1 again deceived Complainant to believe that if accused no