Proceedings under Section 498-A IPC are unmaintainable if the marriage is deemed null and void.

1. Heard Sri Saurabh Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application under Section 4 82 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of the charge-sheet dated 06.12.2019 as well as the cognizance order dated 10.01.2020 in Case No. 18876 of 2021(State of U.P. vs. Akhilesh Keshari & three Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 05 of 2019, under Sections 4 98-A , 323, 504, 506 and Section 3 /4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sonbhadra pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/C.A.W., Robertsganj, Sonbhadra.

3. Facts giving rise to the present case are that opposite party no. 2 had lodged an F.I.R. dated 08.06.2019 under Section 4 98-A , 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 D.P. Act, 1961 against applicants alleging that she got married to applicant no. 1, six years back and out of their wedlock three children were also borne. However, applicants had started harassing her for dowry demand and subsequent applicants had also beaten her. Police after investigation had submitted charge-sheet dated 01.12.2019 against the applicants under Section 4 98-A , 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3 /4 D.P. Act and cognizance was also taken on 10.01.2022.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the impugned proceeding is illegal as opposite party no. 2, claiming herself as the wife of applicant no. 1, lodged the F.I.R. of the impugned proceeding on 08.06.2019 but the applicant got divorced from his first wife on 10.02.2022 therefore opposite party no. 2 was not the legally valid wife of applicant and on the date above F.I.R., hence no offence under Section 4 98-A I.P.C. as well as Section 3 /4 D.P. Act is made out against the applicants. In support of his contention, counsel for the applicants has relied upon a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shivcharan Lal Verma and another vs. State of Madras 17 Vol 15 SCC 369 in which the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that if the marriage itself is null and void, then prosecution under Section 4 98-A I.P.C. against the husband is not maintainable at the instance of the alleged wife. Apart from this, counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on the judgment P. Shivkumar & Ors. vs. State respondent by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1404- 1405 of 2012), in which judgment of Shivcharan Lal Verma (supra) was relied upon. It was also submitted by counsel for the applicants, though the two Judges Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Reema Agarwal vs. Anupam & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2004) had observed that the legitimacy of the marriage for the purpose of Section 4 98-A and 304B I.P.C. is irrelevant. However, the subsequent judgment of Shivcharan Lal Verma (supra) was delivered by the larger Bench consisting of three Judges. It is established law that subsequent judgment delivered by the larger Bench will prevail over the earlier judgment of the lesser Bench.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has relied upon the judgment of Reema Agarwal (supra) and submitted that for the purpose of Section 4 98-A as well as Section 3 /4 of the D.P. Act, strict interpretation regarding the validity of marriage should not be made and liberal consideration should be given to those persons who contracted for marriage and are cohabiting together.

6. After hearing counsel for the parties, it is relevant to mention Section 498-A I.P.C., which is being quoted as under:

"Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—

Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be pun