HARI SHANKAR PRASAD,J. - (1.) THE instant application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 21-6-2004 passed in Cr. Revision No. 28/2004, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro has dismissed the criminal revision.
(2.) FACTS leading to the filing of the application are that the opposite party No. 2, Bina Singh filed a complaint alleging, inter alia, therein that she was married with petitioner on 18-2-1965 and soon thereafter she was subjected to physical and mental torture and assault. It is alleged that her husband was in military service and whenever she went to live with her husband, she was assaulted. It is further alleged that thereafter her husband joined BSL and there he had illicit relationship with several women. It is further alleged that out of her wedlock with the petitioner, she has three sons and 8-9 months ago she was shifted in Prabhat Colony, where she was also subjected to physical and mental torture. It is alleged that her husband brought one Shanti Devi and he has physical relationship with her (Annexure 1). The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complaint has been filed on 17-10-2003 and marriage was solemnized on 18-2-1965 and previously at no point of time any complaint was made or instituted by the opposite party No. 2. It was also submitted that admittedly three children have been born out of the wedlock of petitioner and opposite party No. 2. It is further stated that a petition for dropping the proceeding was also filed on behalf of the petitioner on 20-12-2003 but the said petition was dismissed on 19-2-2004. (Annexure 3). Thereafter the petitioner moved before the Sessions Judge in Cr. Revision No. 28/2004 and that too was dismissed by order dated 21-6-2004. (Annexure 4). It was also pointed out that petitioner had earlier filed a matrimonial suit being Title (M) Suit No. 66/2003, which is pending in the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro against the opposite party No. 2 under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 20-8-2003 and this complaint case was filed after filing of this matrimonial suit and, therefore, this complaint case is vexatious one just only to harass the petitioner. It was also pointed out that even on consideration of contents of the complaint petition, no case under Section 498A/323 IPC is made out and there is no allegation of any demand and no specific nature of cruelty has been alleged for compelling the opposite party No. 2 to commit suicide and the matrimonial suit has been filed two months prior to the filing of the instant complaint.
(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 stating, inter alia, therein that prior to this W.P. (Cr) No. 266/2004, the petitioner had moved Cr. M.P. No. 410/2004 before this High Court and had challenged the order dated 19-2-2000 and this Court vide order dated 26-8-2004 allowed the application and granted exemption under Section 205 Cr.P.C. to the petitioner but at the same time directed the petitioner to remain present personally at the time of framing of charge, recording of statement and at the time of delivery of judgment (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit). It is also submitted that petitioner was having illicit relationship with Shanti Devi and in her presence he established physical relationship with Shanti Devi.;