JAGBIR SINGH Vs. DILBAGH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the proceedings instituted against them on a joint complaint of Dilbagh Singh and Rajpal Singh for offences under Sections 494, 497 and 498 of the Indian Penal Code as well as the order dated 14-1-1988 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jind whereby all the accused petitioners were summoned to face trial for the above referred offences.

(2.) IT is admitted case of the parties that Dilbagh Singh complainant was married with Sunita while his brother Rajpal complainant was married with Ms. Sheela. Both Sunita and Sheela are real sisters and their marriage took place on the same day. Thereafer, Ms. Sheela allegedly contracted second marriage with Jagdish on 10-5-1987 and Ms. Sunita with Kirsan on the same very day. No doubt both the complainants were married on one and the same day and the second marriage was allegedly performed by Ms. Sheela and Sunita with different persons on the same day, yet it cannot be said that all these offences were committed during the course of one transaction especially when the marriages were performed one after the other and not simultaneously. Thus, the filing of the joint complaint is certainly illegal and would certainly result in material prejudice as well as unnecessary harassment to the accused petitioners. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said to be a mere irregularity but an illegality as there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure clubbing altogether different offences committed by different persons but not during the same transaction.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY, the impugned summoning order of the trial Court is hereby quashed. However, there is some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that this complaint be treated on behalf of Dilbagh Singh especially when Ms. Sunita had not filed any petition for quashment of these proceedings. Rajpal Singh, complainant shall, however, be at liberty to file a fresh complaint and the delay in doing so shall have no adverse reflection on its merits as it appears that due to misconception of the concerned counsel this joint complaint was filed. The trial Court shall re-apply its mind for summoning the accused in the complaint of Dilbagh Singh on the basis of evidence already recorded.