Neeraj Kumar Singh and Another. Vs. Smt. Ganga Devi.

Neeraj Kumar Singh and Another. vs Smt. Ganga Devi.

Type Court Judgment Court Uttaranchal Decided Aug 30, 2010

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/915987

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/915987
Court: Uttaranchal High Court
Judge: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Decided On: Aug 30, 2010
Case Number: C-482 No. 807 of 2010.
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

[P. SATHASIVAM ; H.L. GOKHALE, J.J.] - The Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302 - Punishment for murder -- Sunil Yadav s/o Musafir Yadav was instituted. Sunil Yadav was instituted. On 29.04.1997, about 5:30 a.m., at Nawada Sadar Hospital, SI Anil Kumar Gupta recorded the statement of Sunil Yadav s/o Musafir Yadav an...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 - Sections 482, 202, 200 ;

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Neeraj Kumar Singh and Another.

Advocate Mr. S.K. Mandal, Adv.

Respondent

Smt. Ganga Devi.

Legal References

Acts: Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 - Sections 482, 202, 200 ;

Excerpt

[p. sathasivam ; h.l. gokhale, j.j.] - the indian penal code, 1860 section 302 - punishment for murder -- sunil yadav s/o musafir yadav was instituted. sunil yadav was instituted. on 29.04.1997, about 5:30 a.m., at nawada sadar hospital, si anil kumar gupta recorded the statement of sunil yadav s/o musafir yadav and on the basis of his statement fir no 12/97 was registered with govindpur p.s under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307, 447 ipc against upendra yadav, rambalak yadav, basudev yadav, anil yadav, manager yadav, ganuari yadav, damodar yadav, suresh yadav, umesh yadav, muni yadav and naresh yadav. the charge-sheet bearing no. 12/97 was submitted in fir no. 11/97 p.s. govindpur, on 30.06.1997 against brahamdeo yadav, sunil yadav, darogi mahto, maho yadav, paro mahto, kuldeep yadav, sudhir yadav, bale yadav, shivan yadav and suraj yadav and sunil yadav who was later instituted. the charge sheet bearing no. 36/97 was also submitted in fir no. 12/97 p.s. govindpur, on 17.12.1997 against upendra yadav, rambalak yadav, basudev yadav, anil yadav, manager yadav, ganuari yadav, damodar yadav, umesh yadav, muni yadav and naresh yadav except suresh yadav s/o kesho yadav as he had died. informant-naresh yadav (pw-9) informant-sunil yadav (a9 in fir 11/97) brahmdeo yadav, darogi mahto, sunil s/o bale yadav, maho yadav, kuldeep yadav, bale yadav, suraj yadav, shiv nandan yadav, sunil yadav s/o musafir yadav, sudhir yadav and paro mahto, total 11 persons forming a group came there and surrounded them. brahmdeo yadav, sunil yadav, darogi mahto and maho yadav were armed with rifle. bale yadav, kuldeep yadav, shiv nandan yadav and suraj yadav were armed with gandassa. kuldeep yadav gave gandassa blow to munshi yadav......any person whose marriage with such husband or wife has been declared void by a court of competent jurisdiction, nor to any person who contracts a marriage during the life of a former husband or wife, if such husband or wife, at the time of the subsequent marriage, shall have been continually absent from such person as being alive within that time provided the person contracting such subsequent marriage shall, before such marriage takes place, inform the person with whom such marriage is contracted of the real state of facts so far as the same are within his or her knowledge.""495. same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted. whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section having concealed from the person with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted, the fact of the former marriage, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."4. whether the offence is made out against the applicants under section 494 or 495 i.p.c., this has to be examined by the trial court. this is not for this court to examine this matter under section 482 cr.p.c. there is no good ground to interfere with the impugned summoning order dated 20.7.2010 passed by the additional judicial magistrate, khatima, district udham singh nagar in criminal complaint no. 867 of 2010 smt. ganga devi v. neeraj kumar singh.5. the present c-482 application is absolutely devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed in limine. no order as to costs. the registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for necessary compliance.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants against the summoning order dated 20.7.2010 which has been issued by the Additional Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar on a complaint filed by the respondent who is admittedly the wife of applicant no. 1 under Section 494/406 I.P.C. The allegations in the complaint are that applicant no. 1 was married to one "Priti" and now again he has again married with the complaint/respondent in the lifetime of Priti and without the earlier marriage being dissolved. The learned Judicial Magistrate after proceeding under Section 200 read with Section 202 of Cr.P.C. issued summons to the accused persons/applicants. He also examined the brother of "Priti" who has also deposed that his sister has married to applicant no. 1.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that no offence is made out against the applicants under Sections 494/406 I.P.C. If at all any offence is made out that is under Section 495 I.P.C. Sections 494 and 495 I.P.C. are reproduced below for ready reference.

"494. Marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife. Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine. Exception. This section does not extend to any person whose marriage with such husband or wife has been declared void by a court of competent jurisdiction, nor to any person who contracts a marriage during the life of a former husband or wife, if such husband or wife, at the time of the subsequent marriage, shall have been continually absent from such person as being alive within that time provided the person contracting such subsequent marriage shall, before such marriage takes place, inform the person with whom such marriage is contracted of the real state of facts so far as the same are within his or her knowledge."

"495. Same offence with concealment of former marriage from person with whom subsequent marriage is contracted. Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section having concealed from the person with whom the subsequent marriage is contracted, the fact of the former marriage, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."

4. Whether the offence is made out against the applicants under Section 494 or 495 I.P.C., this has to be examined by the trial court. This is not for this Court to examine this matter under Section 482 Cr.P.C. There is no good ground to interfere with the impugned summoning order dated 20.7.2010 passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Complaint No. 867 of 2010 Smt. Ganga Devi v. Neeraj Kumar Singh.

5. The present C-482 application is absolutely devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed in limine. No order as to costs. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for necessary compliance.

Same Court & Year Uttaranchal · 2010 Same Parties Neeraj Kumar Singh and Another. vs Smt. Ganga Devi. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Acts & Sections Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 - Sections 482, 202, ...

Criminal