MAMTA RANI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Application, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the Applicant, Smt. Mamta Rani, with a prayer for quashing of entire further proceeding, pursuant to summoning order, dated 7.2.2014, passed by the Judicial Magistrate-Ist, District Bulandshahr, in Complaint Case No. 02 of 2014, Mukesh vs. Mamta and others, under Section 494 of IPC, Police Station-B.B. Nagar, District-Bulandshahr, as well as order, dated 31.8.2019, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, District Bulandshahr, in Criminal Revision No.456 of 2017, Smt. Mamta Rani vs. State of U.P. and others.

(2.) Learned counsel for applicants argued that it was a false and malicious prosecution, under misuse and mis-exercise of process of law. There was admitted fact of marriage of Smt. Mamta Rani with Mukesh, Opposite party no.2, but this marriage was dissolved, then, second marriage was performed by her with Subhash Singh. No offence was ever committed, but learned Magistrate failed to appreciate it and the learned court of revision, wherein, this fact was raised, also, failed to appreciate it. Hence, this proceeding, for avoiding abuse of process of law and for ensuring ends of justice, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has been filed, with above prayer.

(3.) From very perusal of the complaint, it is apparent that it was filed by Mukesh against Smt. Mamta and his second husband, Subhash Singh, for offences, punishable, under Sections-93, 418 and 494 of IPC, with this contention that Mamata Rani was married with complainant on 11.12.1993, as per Hindu Rituals. A suit for dissolution of marriage, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, was filed and this was decreed on 29.3.2008, but, knowing this fact that the said suit is pending and marriage is still in persistence, accused persons got married on 15.1.2008, which was an offence of bigamy. Hence, this complaint. Magistrate, enquired, by recording statement of complainant, under Section 200 and his witness, Udayvir Singh, under Section 202 of Cr.P.C., wherein, it was specifically stated that Mamta, while, being legally wedded wife of Mukesh, remarried with Subhash Singh on 15.1.2008, when first marriage was in existence, hence, on the basis of above facts and evidence, impugned summoning order was passed. It was well within law and was passed on the basis of evidence, collected by the Magistrate, during his enquiry.