UMRAO & OTHERS Vs. LILA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused-petitioner Umrao was convicted under Sec. 494 Penal Code and the other accused petitioner Heeralal was convicted under Sec. 494 read with Sec. 109 Penal Code by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh Bas and each of them was sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50.00, or in default of payment of fine to further suffer one month's rigorous imprisonment. Each of them preferred an appeal before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge Kishangarh Bas and the learned Judge under his judgment dated June 14, 1985, dismissed the appeal both in respect of conviction and sentence. The present revision petition has been preferred against the aforesaid judgment.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that one Smt. Lila Bai filed a complaint against the accused petitioners on June 12, 1974 in the court of Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh Bas Distt. Alwar under Sec. 494 Penal Code read with Sec. 109 Penal Code wherein a case was set up that her marriage with the accused-petitioner No 1 took place in accordance with Hindu rites about 15 years age in village Kharila Teh. Kishangarh Bas Distt. Alwar, For a period of about 10 years after the marriage, they lived as Husband & Wife and two daughters, namely Prem and Jadiya were born out of the wedlock. But after the birth of Jadiya the behaviour of the accused-petitioner No. 1 Umrao with Lila Bai changed and about three years prior to the filing of the complaint, two days prior to Sankranti, she was turned out of the house and efforts to take her back were not succeeded. As per the case of the complainant, she was dragted by the accused-non-petitioner No. 1 During the subsistence of marriage with the complainant, the accused-petitioner. No. 1 is said to have married on April 13, 1974, the daughter of Heeralal, accused petitioner No. 2 which had knowledge that the complainant was the duly married wife of the accused petitioner No. 1 and the marriage was still subsisting. She had come to know about the intention of accused petitioner No. 1 of marrying again and before marriage a notice was given through advocate on April 27, 1974 asking the accused-petitioner No. 1 Umrao to desist from marrying again during the subsistence of his marriage with the complainant, but it had no effect, and the accused-petitioner contracted second marriage with the daughter of the accused petitioner No. 2 and thus committed the offence of bigamy.

(3.) Learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and the evidence of prosecution was recorded. Thereafter, each of the accused-petitioners was examined under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. to explain the circumstances appearing against them in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. So far as the accused-petitioner Umrao is concerned he came out with a plea that the complainant was living with her father of her own free-will and that he did not contract the second marriage. He further stated that Sultan father of Lila Bai had no other issue and he wants to keep the accused-petitioner No. 1 Umrao as 'Ghar Janwai' and the accused-petitioner No. 1 did not want to live with them and therefore a false case has been lodged against him. So far as the case that accused-petitioner No. 1 had married Daryai, daughter of accused-petitioner No. 2, Heeralal is concerned, Heera Lal came out that Daryai is not his daughter and she did not marry to Umrao. The accused-petitioners examined as many as four witnesses in defence including Umrao accused petitioner No. 1 as DW 1. Learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioners as aforesaid and the appeal too was dismissed.