JUDGMENT V.K. Khanna, J. - This is an application under Section 482. Criminal Procedure Code praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant under Section 494, Indian Penal Code and also for quashing the order of summoning the accused persons dated 13-5-1981. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the application and the documents filed along with that application. 3. The brief facts for the purposes of deciding the present application are, that opposite-party No. 2, Smt. Nirmala Devi (complainant) admittedly the wife of the applicant, filed a complaint under Section 494, Indian Penal Code against his husband Vinod Kumar, the applicant; on the ground that he has married one Smt. Binno even though the complainant is the legally wedded wife of the applicant and is alive. The first complaint was dismissed for non- prosecution on 14-4-1981. The second complaint was thereafter filed on 27-4-1981 and it is in pursuance of the second complaint that the applicant has now been summoned under Section 494 Indian Penal Code and it is these proceedings which are being sought to be quashed by means of this application. The learned counsel for the applicant has urged two points of this application. It has firstly been urged that the dismissal of the first complaint bars the filing of the second complaint. I am unable to accept the aforesaid contention. The second complaint had been filed when the first complaint had been dismissed only in the absence of the complainant and has not been decided on merits. 4. It has then been urged that there is no evidence absolutely which may have entitled the Magistrate to summon the applicant under Section 494, Indian Penal Code Along with the affidavit filed with the application the statements of the witnesses have been annexed as Annexures II, III and IV. A perusal of those statements clearly goes to show that there was evidence of fact that the applicant had married Smt. Binno. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case it therefore cannot be said at this star that the proceedings initiated against the applicant are liable to be quashed under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code. 5. For the reasons stated above the present application is dismissed. The stay order granted by this Court on 21-10-1981 is vacated. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case it therefore cannot be said at this star that the proceedings initiated against the applicant are liable to be quashed under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code. 5. For the reasons stated above the present application is dismissed. The stay order granted by this Court on 21-10-1981 is vacated. The office shall send a copy of this order to the concerned court within a week from today.