The Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri circuit bench discharged a widow in an FIR under Sections 498A, 494 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code accusing her of marrying the husband of the complainant.
The Single Judge Bench of Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee observed, “Here the materials on record including complaint prima facie reveal that allegations were levelled against principal accused, i.e., husband of de facto complainant and as such the court below ought to have held that the criminal prosecution against the present petitioner under the aforesaid section is not sustainable.”
The complainant alleged that her husband subjected her to physical and mental cruelty for failing to fulfil his additional dowry demand; as a result, she and her child were forced to return to her father’s home. In her complaint against the petitioner, she alleged that her husband married the widow, and that after learning of this, she attempted to contact him, only to be threatened over the phone that he would end their marriage.
On the basis of the complaint, the police initiated an investigation and filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner and the husband of the complainant under Section 498A (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), Section 494 (Remarriage during the lifetime of husband or wife), and Section 506 (Penalty for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner submitted an application for discharge under Section 239 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Judicial Magistrate of the 1st Court in Jalpaiguri, which was denied by order dated February 17, 2023. The petitioner lodged an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code with the High Court challenging the Magistrate’s order.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is neither the wife of the de facto complainant’s husband nor a relative of her husband, and in the charge sheet, the police failed to provide any documentary evidence to support the petitioner’s alleged second marriage to the complainant’s husband, so that the present case falls under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
It was further submitted that there cannot have be application of Section 494 of the IPC against present petitioner.
On the other hand, the counsel for the state argued that since the husband of the complainant has married the present petitioner, the petitioner is her husband’s current wife, who has also inflicted maltreatment, and therefore, Section 498A applies to the present petitioner.
The court noted that Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code addresses the situation in which a wife with a living spouse remarries. It was stated that as per the FIR, the petitioner was/is a widow, and as such, Section 494 does not apply in the present context.
The court also noted that, based on a review of the case diary and other materials in the file, there is no evidence that the petitioner is married to the complainant’s husband, nor is there any specific allegation that she has subjected the complainant to mental or physical cruelty.
Consequently, the court dismissed the petitioner in this case.
Comments
0 comment