Y KUNJAPPAN Vs. CHITRALEKHA TARACHAND ANANDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though in this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for various reliefs, the petitioner has restricted the claim in the writ petition for quashing the orders passed by the learned JMFC, 49 th Court, Vikhroli in Case No. 231/N-2007 and the order passed by the learned Session Judge dated 4 th July, 2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 299/2008 and for quashing and setting aside the FIR No. 170/2007 registered with Borivli Police Station and consequent CC No. 1326/PW/2009 pending before the 26 th Court, Borivali, Mumbai.

(2.) It was the contention of the respondent no.1 herein that she got acquainted with the present petitioner which turned out into love affair and they accordingly married on 22 nd May, 1999. Even according to respondent no.1 she is a Hindu whereas the petitioner is Malyali Christian. According to her the marriage was solemnized in Hindu temple according to Hindu Rites and the marriage was also registered on the same day. It was the case of the respondent that on or about 25 th May, 1989, the petitioner left the respondent at her mother's home and had told her that he would later on pick her up. According to respondent, the petitioner did not come to pick her and she tried to contact the petitioner but she could not trace him. However, on 29 th May, 1989 she came to know that the petitioner filed Suit No. 3957/1989 alleging that the marriage was performed by playing fraud. Contending that the petitioner may again try to marry, respondent no.1 filed MJ Petition No. A-996/1990 for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. An interim prayer for restraining the present petitioner from performing another marriage was also made in the said petition. The said proceedings were contested by the petitioner denying any such marriage between the petitioner and the respondent no.1. The detailed written-statement has been filed by the petitioner in the said proceedings. It was sought to be contended by the petitioner in the said proceedings that she was previously married to one Ghanshyamdas.

(3.) The learned Judge of the Family Court on the basis of the evidence that was led before it framed the following issues for determination:- ISSUES FINDINGS