PUSHPA Vs. VELLAMUTHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the accused in C.C. No. 209 of 1986 on the file of the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ulundurpet The prosecution against them for the alleged commission of offences under Section 494 simpliciter and read with 109 IPC was initiated on a private complaint preferred by the respondent before the trial Magistrate. The respondent's son Kaliyamurthy had married the first petitioner on 6 -6 -1985 according to his caste customs. While so, the prosecution cast is that the first petitioner married the second petitioner on 12 -2 -1986 between 6.00 a.m. and 7.30 a.m. at Agasteeswarar Temple, Vetavalam, while her marriage with Kaliyamoorthy was in subsistence. The other petitioners are staled to have abated the bigamous marriage.

(2.) THE prosecution was not initiated by Kaliyamurthy, the first husband of the first petitioner but instituted by his father, the respondent herein.

(3.) MR . K.N. Basha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, contended that the respondent will not be a person aggrieved by the offence and the leave of the Court contemplated under Section 198 Criminal Procedure Code for other persons to file a complaint on behalf of the aggrieved person, will not take into its fold the respondent, on the ground alleged in the petition, praying for leave from the Magistrate. 1 have heard learned counsel appearing for the respondent on this specific ground.