ORDER :- This revision petition is against the judgment of the Sessions Judge of Masulipatam confirming the conviction of the first accused under S. 494, I.P.C. and the sentence of four months rigorous imprisonment and the conviction of the 2nd accused under S. 4(3) of the Madras Hindu (Bigamy Prevention and Divorce) Act and the sentence of Rs. 60 in default, imprisonment.

2. The case against the first petitioner is that he took a third wife while his marriage with the second wife subsisted. Several pleas were taken by the accused, but all of them were rejected and the petitioners were found guilty by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Bandar, which was confirmed by the Sessions Judge of Masulipatam.

3. In revision, the propriety of the convictions is questioned by Miss Sarala on the ground that the complaint is filed by one who is not a person aggrieved within the meaning of S. 198, Criminal P.C. Prom the provisions of S. 198, it is clear that only a complaint filed by a person aggrieved by an offence under S. 494 I.P.C. could be taken cognizance of by a court. So, unless P.W. 1 is a person within the purview of S. 198, Criminal P.C., the Magistrate would not be compete