SURAJBAI Vs. MAMATA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition is directed against the order dated 18.12.2012 passed by III Addl. District Judge, Raisen in Criminal Revision No. 95/2012 affirming the order of Magistrate by which he has framed the under section 494/109 of IPC.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner/accused, placing reliance on : AIR 1991 SC 816 -Santi Deb Berma vs. Smt. Kanchan Prava Devi and : AIR 2001 SC 3576 -S. Nagalingam vs. Sivagami, submits that in present case neither in the private complaint nor in the evidence, fact of "saptapadi" has appeared hence ingredients of Section 494 of IPC are not completed.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner/accused further submits that alleged second marriage was solemnized in District Hoshangabad where as trial is pending in District Raisen, Hence, placing reliance on : AIR 2004 SC 4286 -Y. Abraham Ajith and others vs. Inspector of Police, Chennai and : 2007 CRI. L.J. 2588 (J & K High Court) -S. Karan Singh Sodhi and others vs. Jatender Jeet Kour, learned counsel submits that for want of territorial jurisdiction, this trial is bad in law and order of framing of charge should be set aside.