(1.) Applicant has preferred this revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "The Code"), being aggrieved by the order dated 27/10/2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Khachrod, District Ujjain, in Cr.R.No.62/2013, whereby the order dated 30/11/2012 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagda District Ujjain in Criminal Case No.1293/2012 has been set aside by which the Court has taken cognizance against the respondent for the offence under Section 494 of IPC.
(2.) Prosecution story in briefly stated, is that the applicant was married to the respondent on 26/12/2002 according to muslim rituals and customs and one daughter was born from their wed lock on 09/04/2004. However, certain disputes arose between the parties regarding which the allegation of the applicant is that respondent along with his family members was persistently making demand of dowry and they were ill treating the applicant. In the year 2005, the respondent and his family members ousted the applicant and her daughter from the matrimonial house, therefore, she was compelled to reside with her parents. It is alleged that without taking divorce from applicant, the respondent solemnized second marriage with one Hamida Bee which is illegal and void and punishable under Section 494 of IPC.
(3.) The trial Court recorded the statement of complainant Sayna Bee under Section 200 of "the Code" and witness Mubarak Hussain under Section 202 of "the Code" and on the basis of that the Court took cognizance against the respondent and other accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of taking cognizance, the respondent preferred revision petition before the Sessions Court which was allowed and the order passed by the learned Magistrate for taking cognizance against the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 494 of IPC has been set aside. This order is the subject-matter of challenge before this Court.