Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 494, 504 & 506—Bigamy and criminal intimidation—Prayer to quash summoning order—To constitute an offence under Section 494 IPC, it is necessary that second marriage should have been celebrated with proper ceremonies and in due form—‘Saptapadi’ ceremony under the Hindu Law is one of the essential ingredients to constitute a valid marriage but the said evidence is lacking the present case—Even there is no averment with regard to ‘Saptapadi’ in the complaint as well as in the statements under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC—No prima facie offence is made out against revisionist as the allegation of second marriage is a bald allegation without corroborative materials—In absence of cogent evidence in this regard, it is difficult to hold that the `Saptapadi Ceremony’ of the marriage as contended by the complainant was performed so as to constitute a valid marriage between the parties concerned—Basic ingredients to constitute an offence under Section 494 of IPC are lacking, hence, no offence under Section 494 of IPC is made out against the revisionist—Criminal proceedings against the revisionist initiated by second opposite party under Section 494 of IPC is nothing but a malicious prosecution with an ulterior motive, which is a clear abuse of process of the court, thus, summoning the revisionist under Section 494 IPC vide impugned order is not sustainable—Impugned summoning order so far as it relates to provisions of Section 494 of IPC is concerned, the same is quashed, however, criminal proceedings against revisionist in other provisions i.e. under Section 504, 506 of IPC is concerned, the same shall go on and for the same revisionist is at liberty to appear before the court concerned and apply for bail—Petition allowed in part.
[Paras 12, 20 & 21]