Friday, Apr 19, 2024 | Last Update : 07:41 PM IST
Woman to face trial for ‘second’ wedding
A metropolitan magistrate had summoned her to face further proceedings after a complaint was filed by her new husband.
New Delhi: A woman, who was previously married, has to face trial for concealing the fact and re-marrying another person while the earlier one was still subsisting.
A metropolitan magistrate had summoned her to face further proceedings after a complaint was filed by her new husband.
The new husband came to know of her previous marriage in 2014, eight years after his own marriage to her. Meanwhile, a child was born out of the wedlock.
The woman later moved a sessions court against the magistrate court order. This court also dismissed her appeal. At the time of the marriage with the new husband, the woman claimed that she was a spinster.
Her husband came to know about her previous marriage after he stumbled upon some documents while checking her personal file.
Finally, the woman moved the high court, which also dismissed her plea saying that “these allegations cannot be brushed aside or ignored at this stage.”
“Reliability or veracity of allegations made in the complaint cannot be gone into in the exercise of powers under Section 482 of CrPC. Well settled position is that at the stage of summoning, no roving inquiry is required to be made.
“Only prima facie view is to be taken by the court at that stage to make up the mind on the basis of material available before it as to whether there existed sufficient grounds to proceed against such accused or not,” the high court said.
“It may be mentioned that there is no categorical denial if the petitioner (woman) had not performed marriage with the complainant (her second husband) on 12.03.2006. She did not deny if the child was not born out of this wedlock.
“There are specific and definite allegations in the complaint, whereby the petitioner concealed the factum of her previous marriage. The complainant has produced various documents to prima facie infer that Capt. Bacchan Singh Chauhan (her first husband) had married the petitioner on a specific date and the said marriage was subsisting at the time of her marriage with him,” the high court further said.
