THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4980 of 2023

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.106 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Utnoor, Adilabad District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 494 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioners stating that her marriage was performed with petitioner No.1 on 16.05.2008. After marriage, they lead their marital life happily for four years. Out of their wedlock, they blessed with two children. It is further stated that petitioner No.1 harassed her mentally and physically and necked out her from his house and that petitioner No.1 has kept his children with him only. Later, Panchayat was held in the presence of elders between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2, even then, he did not change his attitude, abused her in filthy language and beat her with hands in their presence and told her that not to come to his house. Thereafter, in the absence of respondent No.2, petitioner No.1 got married with another woman i.e., petitioner No.3 herein and they lead their marital life and blessed with one son. Basing on the said complaint, the Police registered a case in Crime No.127 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 494 and 498-A of IPC and after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet, vide C.C.No.106 of 2022, before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Utnoor, Adilabad District.

3. Heard Sri Chikkudu Prabhakar, learned counsel representing Sri Ch. Chaitanya Mithra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as Sri E. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Sri Gajanand Chakravarthi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that respondent No.2 is not residing along with petitioner No.1 and she left the marital home and residing along with her parents, as such, Section 494 of IPC does not attract to the petitioners and that the Police did not establish anything either oral or documentary to punish the petitioners for the offence under Section 498-A of IPC. Respondent No.2 with mala fide intention and ulterior motive lodged a complaint against the petitioners and the same was registered by the Police without any preliminary enquiry. Further, petitioner No.2 is contract employee in the Government Department, he neither stayed with petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 nor interfered with the matrimonial disputes between them. Therefore, the allegations leveled against the petitioners are vague and baseless and they do not constitute any offence as alleged by respondent No.2 and prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel Assistant Public Prosecutor and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the petitioners harassed respondent No.2, beat hear and necked out from the house of petitioner No.1. Since there are allegations against the petitioners, quashing of proceedings against them, at this stage, does not arise and prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it is to be noted that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are under Section 494 and 498-A of IPC.

7. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 494 of IPC, which reads as under:

494: Marrying again during life-

time of husband or wife.

Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void b