Judgment.- The question that arises for consideration in these two revision cases is whether in a prosecution under section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, it is incumbent upon the complainant to establish that both the marriages pleaded or alleged by him or her were performed in accordance with the religious rites and ceremonies prescribed by the Hindu Law governing the parties. The material facts giving rise to the two revision cases lie in a narrow compass and may be briefly stated:

2. A-1 to A-10 in C.C. No. 323 of 1976 on the file of the Second Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Eluru, were prosecuted for offences punishable under section 494 and section 494 read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code, on a private complaint filed by Kakarala Seetha Devi (P.W. 11). A-3 and A-4 are parents of A-1. A-1 is the husband of P.W. 11. A-2 is the alleged second wife of A-1. A-5 and A-6 are parents of A-2. A-7 and A-8 are sisters of A-1. A-9 is the maternal uncle of A-2 while A-10 is the wife of A-9.

3. The case of the prosecution is that P.W. 11, daughter of P.W. 12, was married to A-1 on 28th May, 1969, that a female child was born to their wedlock on 31st October, 1970, that both of them l

Click Here to Read the rest of this document