HARCHARAN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have filed this criminal revision under Sec. 397/401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 18/11/1998 passed by II Additional Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh in Criminal Appeal No.4/1995 arising out of judgment dtd. 1/2/1995 passed by C.J.M., Tikamgarh in Criminal Case No.756/1994, whereby the applicant No.1 has been convicted under Sec. 494 of I.P.C. and applicants No.2 to 4 have been convicted under Sec. 409/109 of I.P.C. and all have been sentenced to R.I. for 1 year with fine of Rs.2000.00, in default S.I. for 6 months, each respectively.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the instant revision are that respondent No.1 filed a complaint against the applicants under Sec. 494, 120 and 109 of I.P.C. before C.J.M. Tikamgarh on 8/6/1991 alleging that her marriage was solemnized with applicant No.1 Harcharan in the year 1981 according to Hindu rites and customs. After marriage her husband applicant No.1, father in-law applicant No.2 and deceased mother-in-law Jamuna were used to harass her and ousted her from their house after three years of the marriage. On 27/5/1991 when respondent No.1 received information that her husband applicant No.1 is going to contact second marriage her brother Bhagwandas along with Panjua Chowkidar, Param Mate, Achhelal reached in the house of Pushpa Bai where they found that applicant No.1 was going to marry with Pushpa Bai applicant No.3 according to Hindu rites and customs. Despite their raising objection the applicant No.1 married with applicant No.3. Therefore, applicants have committed the offence punishable under Sec. 494 read with Sec. 109 of I.P.C. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and learned Magistrate took cognizance against the applicants. The charges were framed against the applicant No.1 under Sec. 494 and 494/109 of I.P.C. The applicants stated that a false case is filed against them. After appreciation of evidence learned trial Court held applicants guilty and further in Criminal Appeal No.4/1995 learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh vide judgment dtd. 18/11/1998 also dismissed the appeal.

(3.) Shri S.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that both the courts below have not properly and effectively appreciated the evidence adduced by respondent No.1 and it is not proved that applicant No.1 has solemnized his marriage with applicant No.3 as per Hindu rites and customs.