NISHIKANT ASHOK KALANKE Vs. PANKAJA NISHIKANT KALANKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Counsel for the applicants is present, however, none present for respondent No.1-original complainant.

(2.) In the order dated 31st Aug. 2016, it is observed that respondent No.1 - Pankaja had filed complaint against present applicants and others for having committed an offence under Sections 494, 107 read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code and the order of issuance of process was under challenge before this Court in Criminal Application No.2267/2002. This Court, by order dated 22nd July 2009, in the said Criminal Application No.2267/2002 along with Criminal Application No.2301/2002 quashed the order of issuance of process with the observations that wife Pankaja faced severance of marriage with her husband, present petitioner No.1 - Nishikant in the matrimonial proceedings and by virtue of the order dated 5th Sept. 2003 in Family Court Appeal, the divorce petition is confirmed. The marital tie between Petitioner No.1 - Nishikant and respondent No.1 - Pankaja no more subsists w.e.f. 22nd Sept. 2000. Even though, the last chance is given, none present for the respondent No.1-original complainant.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the relations as husband and wife between the parties are not subsisting and both of them got remarried. Furthermore, the learned Counsel submits that there is no entrustment of property and thus, the ingredients of Sec. 406 of Indian Penal Code are not attracted. Learned counsel further submits that impugned order dated 1st March 2005 of issuance of process against the present petitioners for the offence punishable under Sec. 406 read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code is improper, incorrect and illegal.