KANAGASABAI AMMAL Vs. P SUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision case against the order passed by the Magistrate.

(2.) THE petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent alleging that she is first wife of the first respondent and that the first respondent has married the 2nd respondent with the complicity of other respondents on 26. 1. 1983. After the sworn statement of the petitioner the magistrate has taken the case on file and issued summonses to the accused. It appears also that summonses were issued to some of the witnesses cited by the petitioner. THE case was adjourned several times and the witness as cited by the petitioner did not appear. THEre is nothing to show that the summons have been effectively served upon the witnesses. However, the Magistrate by order dated 6. 7. 1984 finding that no evidence was forthcoming on the side of the petitioner that as per the deposition of the petitioner she was not eye witness to the alleged second marriage. When the marriage was witnessed only by persons whom she has arrayed as witnesses and who have not come forward to depose, discharged the accused under Scc. 245 (1), Criminal Procedure Code.