Mrs. Vijay Lakshmi,J.

The same story of an innocent Indian bride being duped by her NRI husband is repeated here in this case. The revisionist No.1 residing at America performed a second marriage with revisionist No.2. Her first wife Priyambada Tripathi ( Opposite Party No.2 in the instant revision) filed a complaint case against him in the court of Magistrate under section 494 I.P.C (bigamy) impleading the second wife also. Learned magistrate after recording her statement and also of the witnesses under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C respectively, summoned the accused persons (both the revisionists). But the revisionists taking advantage of the situation of residing at America did not appear. On their behalf two counsel appeared on 14.11.1990 and challenged the maintainability of the complaint case. They also sought exemption from personal attendance of the accused person which was granted till the stage of case-proceedings reaching up to recording of statement of witness under section 244 Cr.P.C. The evidence under section 244 was closed on 11.6.1992 but when even after expiry of the period so exempted, the accused persons did not appear, coercive methods were adopted against