Important points:
Cheating is an essential ingredient of the offence. Under the Explanation to Section 415 of the IPC, a dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of Section 419 of the IPC, but deception by itself does not amount to cheating unless the person so deceived is induced to do any of the acts specified in the Section, which he would not have done if he were not so deceived

ORDER :

1. This criminal revision petition is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered by the third Additional Sessions Court, (Ad hoc-I), Thodupuzha in Crl.Appeal No.33/2000 dated 05.12.2009 whereby the learned third Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence imposed against the 1st accused by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thodupuzha in C.C.No.334/97 dated 31.1.2000 for the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 494 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC').

2. The 2nd respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'PW1') lodged a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha arraigning the revision petitioner (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1st accused') and 5 other persons as accused. It is the case of PW1 that the 1st accused had married her in accordance with the customary rites on 10.9.1986 and a male child was born to them in the wedlock on 23.9.1991. It is averred that the marriage between the 1st accused and PW1 is still subsisting. While so, on 10.9.1994, the 1st accused had married the 2nd accused at Sreekrishnaswami Temple, Thodupuzha with the assistance of the accused 3 to 6. The further allegation is that the 1st accused for the purpose of concealing his identity to cheat PW1 caused to enter his fake address in the marriage register with the intention of screening him from legal punishment. Thus, the accused 1 to 6 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 201, 419 and 494 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

3. PW1 filed a private complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha against 1st the accused and 5 others alleging the aforesaid offences. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha after recording sworn statement of PWs.1 and 2 and after having heard the learned counsel for PW1, registered the case as C.C.No.9/95 and made over the case to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thodupuzha for trial and disposal. On receipt of the records, the learned Magistrate renumbered the case as C.C.No.334/97.

4. During the trial, the complainant was examined as PW1. Her brother who claimed to be an eye witness of the second marriage was examined as PW2. The Manager of Sreekrishnaswami Temple where the alleged second marriage was taken place was examined as PW3. Exts.P1 to P4 were marked. Ext.P1 is the marriage certificate showing the marriage of the accused with PW1. Ext.P2 is a certificate to prove the alleged second marriage. Ext.P3 is a certificate issued by Udumbannoor Grama Panchayat which would show that there is no one in the address of the person whose marriage has been shown to be held on 10.9.94 at Thodupuzha Sreekrishnaswami Temple as mentioned in Ext.P2. By judgment dated 31.1.2000, the learned Magistrate convicted the 1st accused of the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 494 read with Section 34 of the IPC. However, the learned Magistrate acquitted the 1st accused of the offence under Section 201 of the IPC and the accused 2 to 6 of all the charges levelled against them. Accordingly, the 1st accused was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months more for the offence punishable under Section 494 of the IPC. Further, the 1st accused was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence under Section 419 of the IPC.

5. The 1st accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.33/2000 before the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha which was later made over to the Additional Sessions Court, Ad hoc-I. By its judgment dated 14.11.2002, the appeal was allowed and the 1st accused was acquitted of all the charges. The reason for the acquittal is that there is no valid proof so far as the first marriage was concerned. PW1 c