Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

On 06.12.2011, complainant again came to PS and informed the I.O that his daughter 'D' had married accused Pramod resident of Village Thalia Nangal, PS Musajha, District Badaiu, U.P and was living with him at the said village. Though, efforts were made to search for the victim as well as the accused at disclosed destination, there was no clue of either of them. The I.O thus initiated proceedings to have accused declared as proclaimed offender.

On 21.06.2013, Smt. Gurma Devi, wife of complainant, informed the I.O that her daughter 'D' and accused were residing in a jhuggi at Sector­8, near Police Chowk, Ambala. Accordingly, a raiding party comprising of lady Ct. Archna and HC Narender was organized by ASI Prem Raj, which conducted raid and apprehended victim 'D' and the accused as well as their four months old daughter from a jhuggie at Ambala and brought them to Delhi. The further investigation of the case thereafter were assigned to W/ASI Raj Devi, who got the victim and accused as well as their minor daughter medically examined. She also got recorded statement of the victim u/s 164 Cr.PC and thereafter produced the victim before concerned CWC at Hari Nagar, from where she was handed over in custody of her parents. During the course of further investigations, I.O obtained age proof of the victim from the school, wherein victim had studied. She also got the exhibits of the case sent to FSL Rohini. It was also revealed during the investigation that accused was already married to one Pushpa Devi, prior to his marriage with the victim, and had not taken divorce from his first wife. Accordingly, section 495 IPC and section 9 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 were added. After completing the investigations, the charge sheet was prepared and was filed in the court.

19. The PW­20, W/SI Manju Yadav, deposed that on 26.06.2013, after entrustment of the investigation of the present case, she got deposited the exhibits of the present case with FSL Rohini through PW­14 Ct. Vikas and obtained the age proof of the victim child D from her school. She further deposed that she also got the marriage of accused with the victim D verified through HC Ashok from UP and that HC Ashok also made inquiry from the first wife of accused and that, thereafter, Section 495 IPC and Section 9 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act were added.

34. In view of the statement of victim D u/s 164 Cr.P.C as well as her statement before the court, no offence u/s 363/366/376 IPC is made out against the accused.

35. Now coming to the allegations u/s 495 IPC, it is observed that said offence is punishable under Chapter XX of the IPC and thus, as per Section 198 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the court cannot take cognizance of an offence u/s 495 IPC except upon a complaint made by some person aggravated by the offence. The Section 198 of the Cr.P.C provides as under :­ "198. Prosecution for offences against marriage - (1) No Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Chapter XX of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) except upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved by the offence :

Provided that in the absence of the husband, some person who had care of the woman on his behalf at that time, when such offence was committed may, with the leave of the Court, make a complaint on his behalf.

(3) .......

(4) .........

(5) ......... "

36. The following observation by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of A. Subhash Babu vs. State of A.P. & Anr., in Crl. Appeal no. 1428 of 2011 (Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) no. 6349 of 2010) decided on 21st of July 2011, also make it clear that though, the 'second wife' entitled to lodge complaint against a husband, who contracted marriage with her by concealing former marriage, such a prosecution can be initiated only by filing a complaint by her :­ "............ The reference to Section 494 IPC in Section 495 IPC, makes it clear that Section 495 IPC is extension of Section 494 IPC and part and parcel of it. The concealment spoken of in Section 495 IPC would be from the woman, with whom the subsequent marriage is performed. Therefore, the wife with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted after concealment of former marriage, would also be entitled to lodge complaint for commission of offence punishable under Section 495 IPC. Where second wife alleges that the accused husband had married her according to Hindu rites despite the fact that he was already married to another lady and the factum of the first marriage was concealed from her, the second wife would be an aggrieved person within the meaning of Section 198 Cr.P.C. If the woman with whom the second marriage is performed by concealment of former marriage is entitled to file a complaint for commission of offence under Section 495 IPC, there is no reason why she would not be entitled to file complaint under Section 494 IPC more particularly when Section 495 IPC is extension and part and parcel of Section 494 IPC...."