2019 (12) TMI 1319 - SC - Indian Laws

Validity of Second Marriage during the subsistence of the first marriage - lack of evidence - offences punishable under Sections 493, 494, 120 B and 506(II) IPC - HELD THAT - Unfortunately, the High Court put the cart before the horse and held that the appellant had not produced any evidence to prove the entry in the Government Gazette though it is a relevant fact under Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act. Much before the case could reach the stage of trial, the High Court shut the door for the appellant and pre concluded the issue as though there was no evidence at all. This is completely contrary to law - A look at the complaint filed by the appellant would show that the appellant had incorporated the ingredients necessary for prosecuting the respondents for the offences alleged. The question whether the appellant will be able to prove the allegations in a manner known to law would arise only at a later stage. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of criminal complaint under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by High Court based on lack of evidence.

Analysis:
The appellant, a legally wedded wife, filed a complaint against her husband and another woman for alleged offences under Sections 493, 494, 120-B, and 506(II) IPC. The High Court quashed the complaint, emphasizing the need for evidence to prove the marriage under Section 494 IPC. The appellant contended that the High Court erred in dismissing the complaint at the initial stage, as the Court's role under Section 482 is limited and should not assess the likelihood of proving the allegations.

The first respondent argued that the ingredients for offences under Sections 493 and 494 were not met, highlighting that bigamy requires an actual marriage per Section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Other alleged offences were deemed incidental. The Supreme Court reiterated that under Section 482, the Court should only assess if the complaint contains allegations forming the basis of the offences and if pre-conditions for cognizance are met.

The appellant's complaint detailed the marriage between the husband and the other woman, supported by a Gazette notification. The High Court's premature dismissal without allowing the case to proceed to trial was deemed contrary to law. The Supreme Court held that the appellant included necessary ingredients in the complaint, and the ability to prove the allegations would be determined later. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the High Court's order, instructing the trial court to expedite proceedings independently.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of allowing the legal process to proceed, ensuring evidence is evaluated at the appropriate stage, and directing trial courts to assess complaints based on their merits without influence from prior judgments.