- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record. By way of the instant application, the applicants have sought for quashment of the proceeding in Complaint Case No.384 of 2003 Reeta Devi Vs. Ramesh Chaurasia, under Sections 494, 109 I.P.C., Police Station Phephana, District Ballia pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia.
(2.) At the very outset, while claiming innocence of the applicants, it has been claimed that no offence has been committed by the applicants under Sections 494, 109 I.P.C. The claim that during subsistence of the previous marriage, the husband of opposite party no.2 entered into nuptial knot with applicant no.3 Meena Devi daughter of Jagar Nath is baseless, false and vexatious to the utter annoyance of the applicants. The entire complaint moved by the complainant does not make any criminal liability as such.
(3.) It has been further added that merely on account of verbal claim, it cannot be established that any offence under Section 494 I.P.C. is made out. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicants has also described ingredient of Section 494 I.P.C. and claimed that by virtue of ingredient involved in this case, the complainant may amply prove the fact of subsequent marriage performed by her husband Ramesh Chaurasia but no such proof has been produced by the complainant. Mere verbal claim has been made which has not been substantiated by the facts and circumstances of the case. The present applicants have nothing to do with the offence in question.;