CHAMELI DEVI Vs. VINOD KUMARI GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed on 19.7.1985 by Shri Sripal Singh, Vlth Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh, in Criminal Revision No. 483 of 1984. The learned Judge was disposing of the revision against the order passed by Sri J.P. Singh, VIIth Additional Munsif-Magistrate, Aligarh, dated 11.12.1984.

(2.) It may be mentioned here that the proceedings under Sec. 494 read with Sec. 109 Indian Penal Code were started at the instance of Smt. Vinod Kumari alias Bina against the present revisionists as well as Lakshmi Narain Gupta and Smt. Nashmi Gupta. It was alleged that Lakshmi Narain Gupta was her married husband, the marriage having taken place according to Hindu rites, and during her life time without her consent he had contracted second marriage with Smt. Nashmi Gupta and thus has committed an offence punishable under Sec. 494 Indian Penal Code Against the present revisionists the mere allegation was that they were present in the office of the Marriage Officer at the time of registration of the second marriage with Nashmi Gupta and were thus guilty of the offence under Sec. 494 Indian Penal Code with the help of Sec. 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate did not agree with this contention. He discharged the present revisionists. Then a revision was preferred, being Criminal Revision No. 483 of 1984 and the learned Vith Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 19.7.1985 quashed the order passed by the learned Magistrate and directed him to proceed against all the accused. Lakshmi Narain Gupta and Nashmi Gupta have not joined in this revision. It is limited to redress the grievance of 8 persons only, namely Smt. Chameli Devi, Pramod Kumar Gupta, Hari Om, Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Rajwati, Asha Rani, Noshiyar Khan and Ram Parkash Upadhyaya. Against these petitioners the charge is under Sec. 494 read with Sec. 109 of the Indian Penal Code. Sec. 109 lays down punishment for the abetment in the act abetted is committed in its consequence and there is no other express provision made in the Indian Penal Code for the punishment of any such abetment. The abetment is defined under Sec. 107 Indian Penal Code as instigating to, or engaging with any person in any conspiracy for doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and thirdly intentionally aiding, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Even Explanation added to Sec. 107 simply says that any person who, by wilful misrepresentation or by wilful concealment of a material fact, which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. In this case the statements of Devendra Kumar and the complainant have been read over to me by the learned counsel for the respondent. Even they do not say that there was any conspiracy between the present revisionists and Lakshmi Narain Gupta, as a result of which the fact of Lakshmi Narain Gupta's first marriage was concealed or sought to be concealed. There is absolutely no allegation of the fact that besides remaining present in the office of the Marriage Officer at the time of the second marriage these revisionists did anything else. Even if they are related to Lakshmi Narain Gupta and some of Smt. Nashmi Gupta, it will still not make out any case against them to be covered under Sec. 109 Indian Penal Code Hence the order of discharge so far as these revisionists was concerned was perfectly a just order and the learned Additional Sessions Judge had no justification to reverse that order in respect of the present revisionists.

(3.) In the result, the revision is allowed. The order passed on 19.7.1985 by Sri Sripal Singh, Vlth Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Criminal Revision No. 483 of 1985, so far as the present revisionists, namely Sint. Chameli Devi, Pramod Kumar Gupta, Hari Om, Rajendra Prasad Gupta, Smt. Rajwati, Smt. Asha Rani, Noshiyar Khan and Ram Prakash Upadhyaya are concerned is set aside and the order passed by Sri J. Singh Vllth Additional Munsif Magistrate, Aligarh on 1 1.12.19 in respect of these revisionists is restored. Revision allowed.