Allahabad High Court
Vijai Shankar Yadav & Others vs State Of U.P. & Another on 2 August, 2010
Court No. - 53 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1059 of 1996 Petitioner :- Vijai Shankar Yadav & Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- B.N. Tiwari Respondent Counsel :- A.G.A.,A.K. Pandey Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J.
Heard Mr. B.N. Tiwari for the applicants and the learned AGA for the respondent no.1 and perused the record.
This is a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the summoning order dated 14.7.1995 passed in complaint case no. 305 of 1995 (Smt. Indu Yadav Vs. Vijay Shankar Yadav and others) whereby the learned Magistrate (Third Additional Munsif Magistrate), Ballia has summoned the applicants to face trial under sections 494 read with 109 IPC. It appears that the respondent no.2 filed a complaint against the applicants in the court of the Magistrate with the allegations that she is legally wedded wife of the petitioner no.1 and during the continuance of the marriage between the respondent no.2 and the petitioner no.1, the petitioner no.1 solemnized a second marriage with one Tara Devi and other applicants abetted the applicant no.1 in performing the second marriage.
In support of the complaint, the statement of the respondent no.2 was recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. One witness PW-1 Jang Bahadur, was also examined under section 202 Cr.P.C. who has given an eye witness account regarding the performance of the second marriage by the applicant no.1 and has also stated that the remaining applicants actively assisted the applicant no.1 in performing the second marriage. The learned Magistrate, on the basis of the statement of the complainant and the said witness was of the view that there were sufficient materials to proceed with the case. Accordingly the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants under section 494 readwith 109 IPC.
Mr. B.N. Tiwari learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the respondent no.2 is not a legally wedded wife of the applicant no.1 Vijay Shankar, therefore, the allegation of bigamy is groundless.
Under section 482 Cr.P.C. merits of the case cannot be examined. Whatsoever allegations have been made in the complaint they have to be taken at their face value. If the allegations made in the complaint coupled with the evidence adduced in support of the complaint make out a case to summon an accused, the summoning order cannot be quashed on the ground that the allegations made in the complaint as well as the statements of the complainant and witnesses are not trustworthy. The question of credibility of the statement of the complainant and witnesses is a matter of trial and this question may be raised before the trial court itself.
In view of the facts and circumstances stated above I do not find any error in the impugned order, therefore, the petition is dismissed. Interim stay, if any, is vacated.
Order Date :- 2.8.2010 MTA