PADULLAPARTHI MUTYALA PARADESHI Vs. PADULLAPARTHI SUBBALAKSHMI AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of importance concerning the interpretation of Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act (Central Act XXV of 1955) read with Section 494 I. P. C. is involved in this reference which has been made by my learned brother, Basi Reddy, J.

(2.) THIS revision petition is filed by the petitioner (1st accused) against Criminal Appeal No. 338 of 1959 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Rajahmundry who dismissed it. That appeal arose out of C. C. No. 66 of 1959 on the file of the Additional District Munsif -Magistrate, Ramachandrapuram. As against the 1st accused a private complaint was laid under Section 494 I. P. C. read with Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Central Act XXV of 1955) alleging that this accused, a retired elementary School teacher, contracted a marriage with the 2nd accused, who is the daughter of accused 3 and 4, even though he had at the date of the marriage with the 2nd accused the complainant as his wife. The 2nd accused is the second wife of 1st accused; and accused 3 and 4 who are the father and mother of the 2nd accused, stood charged under Section 494 read with sections 109 and 114 I. P. C.

(3.) BOTH the lower courts relied upon the evidence of these witnesses and also that of A -3 who deposed as D. W. 2 and held that the prosecution established that the bigamous marriage was solemnized. Before the learned Sessions Judge, a point that the ingredients necessary to establish a Hindu marriage have not been proved, was taken on behalf of the 1st accused. It was put on the ground that as the parties are Brahmins, it was incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that the ceremonies at the marriage including that of Saptapadi have in fact taken place. The learned Sessions Judge has pointed out that, beyond suggesting that P. Ws. 2 and 3 were bribed by A -3, no other questions were put in cross -examination. Keeping therefore in mind that there was no cross -examination directed as to the want of proper and necessary ceremonies and remarking that