Shardul Singh Tahilsing v. Prakash Kaur Shardulsing Kuldip Kaur
1986-03-31
D.C.GHEEWALA
body1986
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : D.C. Gheewala, J. The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the complaint and process issued in Criminal Case No. 337 of 1935 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gandhidham at Kutch. 2. The petitioner and respondent No. 1 were married in early forties. They separated in 1946. Respondent No.1 thereafter 30 years in 1977 filed maintenance application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code which was settled. She had also filed a complaint under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code in the year 1980 against the present petitioner and respondent No. 2. That complaint seems to have been withdrawn. 3. After the matter was carried before the Supreme Court and ultimately pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court, Rs. 22,000/- were paid by the petitioner to respondent No.1, once again respondent No. 1 has filed a complaint under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner. 4. The petitioner has prayed that the complaint be quashed inasmuch as respondent No. 1 had knowledge of the marriage between petitioner and respondent No. 2 long time back and she had filed similar complaint in 1980. 5. Mr. Y.S. Mankad the learned advocate for the petitioner urged that under Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the present complaint is clearly time-barred. 6. Respondent No. 1 though served has not cared to appear nor has she filed any appearance through any advocate Respondent No. 1 seems to have filed a similar complaint in the year 1980 which was withdrawn and once again she filed another complaint of similar nature in 1985. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 seems to have taken place some decades back. Apart prom the fact that the complaint is time-barred, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 should not be allowed to be challenged inasmuch as the children born from the wedlock would be brandished as illegitimate. 7. The complaint being time-barred, is required to be quashed and is accordingly quashed. Rule is made absolute. Petition allowed.