MADHAVAN VYDIAR Vs. AJITH SIMHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A son is prosecuting his father for bigamy. The father now seeks to invoke High Court's inherent jurisdiction to quash the prosecution on the premise that a son cannot launch such prosecution against his father or mother for the offence of bigamy.

(2.) IN the complaint filed by the son he stated that the marriage between his father and mother was solemnised in 1961 and four children including the complainant were born to them and while the marriage was subsisting his father (the present petitioner) has undergone the ceremony of marriage with another woman (Prabhavathy, who is second accused in the complaint)on 6.9.1987 and that the complainant came to know of his father's matrimonial reduplication only recently.

(3.) SEC.494 of the Indian Penal Code is the offence of bigamy, SEC.497 is the offence of adultery and SEC.498 is the offence of enticing a married woman. Those sections fall within Chapter XX of the I.P.C. which contains penal provisions for offences "relating to marriage". SEC. 198 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") imposes certain restrictions in launching prosecution for offences against marriage. As per the provision no court shall take cognizance of any of the offences punishable under the aforesaid Chapter XX except upon a complaint made by some person "aggrieved by the offence". The proviso to SEC. 198(1) has two clauses. As per the first clause to the proviso to SEC. 198(1) when the person aggrieved is under the age of eighteen or is under the disabilities mentioned therein another person can make the complaint with the leave of the Court. As per the second clause if the aggrieved person is the husband and is serving in any of the Armed Forces of the Union any other person authorised by the husband can make the complaint on his behalf. On the strength of the above two clauses learned counsel contended that the Code contemplated only a spouse as the aggrieved person for making a complaint for bigamy.