MEENA KUMARI Vs. BHUPENDER KAUSHAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge herein is to the judgment dated 8th March, 2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, camp at Karsog in criminal appeal No.3 of 2008 whereby while accepting the appeal preferred by the respondents (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') against the judgment dated 29.11.2007 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Karsog, district Mandi in private complaint No.342-1 of 2001, convicting thereby them under Sections 493 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code and sentencing to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each, has acquitted them from the charge.

(2.) The legality and validity of the impugned judgment has been assailed on the grounds, inter alia, that learned lower appellate Court has miserably failed to appreciate the evidence qua the earlier marriage of accused No.1 subsisting on the day when he solemnized the 2nd marriage with appellant herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') in February, 2001. Also that the findings recorded by learned lower appellate Court that there was no valid marriage subsisting between said Smt. Kamlesh and accused No.1, are said to be without any basis. The accused persons have hatched conspiracy with each other by representing that the marriage of accused No.1 with Smt. Kamlesh was dissolved and made her agreeable to solemnize the marriage with accused No.1 and as such, have committed the offence punishable under Section 493 of Indian Penal Code. The accused, therefore, were rightly convicted by the trial Court and, as such, the impugned judgment being legally and factually unsustainable is sought to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) In a nutshell, the allegations against the accused persons are that accused No.1 was married to one Smt. Kamlesh (PW-6). All the accused represented to the father (PW-2) of complainant (PW-1) that the marriage of said accused with Smt. Kamlesh stands dissolved by way of divorce. The complainant and her father believed such a representation made to them to be true and settled her marriage with accused No.1. Admittedly, the marriage was solemnized as per Hindu Rites and customs on 28.2.2001. They started living as husband and wife and cohabited as such. It is on 6.8.2001, one relative of Smt. Kamlesh, the previous wife of accused No.1, came to the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Thali and asked for the certificate of her marriage with the said accused. The said relative of the previous wife further disclosed that the marriage of accused No.1 was still subsisting with her and further that it is the said accused who had abandoned and turned her out from the matrimonial home after subjecting her to cruelty. In turn, the Pradhan, Shri Thakur Dass informed the father of the complainant about the subsistence of the previous marriage of accused No.1 with said Smt. Kamlesh. On this, the brother of complainant, Roshan Lal came to Shimla where she was residing with accused persons. On verification from the accused persons, they produced certain papers pertaining to some case of dowry. The accused, however, assured the brother of complainant to show him the relevant papers in near future. The accused No.1 had taken the complainant to her parental house on 18.8.2001 and after leaving her there returned on 19.8.2001 in the morning assuring her that he will show the papers of divorce very soon, however, did not turn-up till 8th September, 2001. On this, the complainant went to his residence alongwith her father, Duni Chand, Shri Thakur Dass, Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Thali, brother, Roshan Lal, Prem Lal and other Roshan Lal. The accused persons told them to wait for one month and complainant was again made to cohabit with accused No.1. As agreed, on 2.10.2001, all the aforesaid relatives of the complainant came to the house of the accused persons. She, however, was turned out from the matrimonial home and all the accused manhandled them and also proclaimed that accused No.1 is not a divorcee and they can do whatever they want. The complainant returned to her parental house and started living there.