AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jaswant Singh, J.—Prayer u/s 482 Cr.PC is for quashing of order dated 6.7.2010 passed by the learned JMIC, Faridabad whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial in a criminal complaint filed by Smt. Prashansha @ Rinki-respondent No. 2 u/s 494, 120-B IPC.
As per allegations respondent No. 2 was married with petitioner No. 1 Deepinder Partap Singh Bhadhauria on 26.5.2003 and out of this wedlock a female child was born on 6.2.2006. Later on matrimonial dispute arose between complainant and petitioner No. 1 and an FIR in this regard was lodged by the complainant-respondent No. 2. It is alleged that petitioner No. 1 without obtaining the decree of divorce from any court of law has performed marriage with petitioner No. 2 Smt. Priyanka Devi @ Seema on 13.11.2008.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that false allegations have been made in the complaint regarding the marriage of petitioner No. 1 with petitioner No. 2 and that in fact she is wife of one Amit son of Rajesh Singh resident of Uttar Pradesh. Reference in this regard has been made to Annexure P-6, alleged marriage certificate signed by Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Biriea Thukran Ramabai Nagar, Kanpur Rural and Annexure P-7 which is a photocopy of marriage invitation card regarding the marriage of petitioner No. 2 with said Amit son of Rajesh Singh.
After hearing learned Counsel for the petitioners and perusing the impugned order, I find no ground to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C.
A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the complainant-respondent No. 2 has deposed about the re-marriage of petitioner No. 1 with petitioner No. 2 without taking any divorce from her (complainant). In support of her allegations, she examined one Shankar Singh as CW2. In addition to that, she also produced on record a Certificate (Ex.C2) issued by Sarpanch of village Biria Ghadewa regarding marriage of petitioner No. 1 with petitioner No. 2, and a photocopy of marriage invitation card. It is on the basis of this oral as well as documentary evidence led by the complainant-respondent No. 2 that learned JMIC, Faridabad found that a prima facie case under Sections 494 and 120-B IPC was made out against the petitioners and accordingly, they have been summoned in the aforesaid complaint.
In view of the above, no case for interference is made out.
Dismissed.