Darshan Singh vs Manjit Kaur

G. S. Chahal, J.

Darshan Singh petitioner has moved this criminal miscellaneous under section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing of the complaint Annexure PI and the summoning order dated, 281989, passed by the Judicial Magistrate I Class Batala, Annexure P2.

Smt. Manjit Kaur, complainant respondent brought a complaint Annexure P1 against Darshan Singh, petitioner and 9 others, for offences under secs 494/109, IPC. It was averred by the complainant that she was married to Darshan Singh petitioner on 5 4.81, in accordance with the Sikh rites by taking 4 Lawans around Shri Guru Granth Sahib at village Badowal Khurd, Tehsil Batala. This marriage was performed in the presence of respectables of the village and her father Gurparkash Singh and Gurpartap Singh, the go between. On 1385 the petitioner had remarried Smt. Balbir Kaur at village Dheerowal, according to the Sikh rites, Anand Karaj by taking 4 Lawans around Shri Guru Granth Sahib. This marriage was performed by Surat Singh in presence of Sudagar Singh and others. On the day the marriage was performed, her father Gurparkash Singh and Gurpartap Singh, aforesaid, had reached the spot and informed the parties that the petitioner was already married to the respondent and that the second marriage should not be performed, but the accused insisted and since then the petitioner and Smt. Balbir Kaur have been living as, husband and wife and out of their wedlock, a male child was born, to Smt. Balbir Kaur on 221088. Accused3 to 10 had actively participated in the second marriage performed by the petitioner with Smt. Balbir Kaur. Vide order Annexure P2, the learned Magistrate ordered the summoning of the accused persons, including the petitioner. A revision preferred against that order was dismissed by Sh. G. S. Khurana, Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide order dated 19491.

The petitioner has challenged this prosecution inter alia on the basis that previously a complaint had been filed by the complainant with respect to the same offence against the petitioner, Smt. Balbir Kaur and Niranjan Singh dated 23486. Annexure P4 and the same had been dismissed on 17786 on a default committed by the complainant for appearance in Court vide order Anx. P5. No second complaint on the same allegations could be filed. In the complaint Annexure P1. no reference had been made to the previous complaint, nor have any facts been mentioned which may justify a second complaint.

In the return filed, the factum of filing the previous complaint and its dismissal have not been denied.

In Parmatha Nath Talukdar & Anr. v. Saroj Ranjan Sarkar, AIR 1962 SC 876 their Lordships held that an order of dismissal under Section 203, Criminal Procedure Code, is no bar to the entertainment of a second complaint on the same facts, but it will be entertained only in exceptional circumstances, e. g. where the previous order was passed on an incomplete record or on a misunderstanding of the nature of the complaint or it was manifestly absurd, unjust or foolish or where new facts which could not with reasonable diligence, have been brought on the record in the previous proceedings, have been adduced.

Following this judgment, their Lordships in Bhindeshwari Prasad Singh v. Kali Singh, AIR 1957 SC 2432 held that a second complaint could lie only on new facts or even on previous facts only if a special case is made out.

In the present case, the facts of filing of the previous complaint and its dismissal were with held from the Court and the Court had no occasion to examine if the complaint really relates to new facts or there was a justification for allowing the second complaint on the same facts. After a lapse of more than 11/2 years from the dismissal of the first complaint the complainant has come to the Court, aggrieved of the same offence and still withholding the factum of the previous complaint and its dismissal. I accept the contention of the learned counsel that there were no special circumstances which could justify the filing of a fresh complaint. The prosecution on the basis of such a complaint is an abuse of the process of the Court. I hereby accept the criminal miscellaneous and quash the impugned complaint and all the subsequent proceedings.

JUDGMENT accordingly.