JUDGMENT (Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J.) 1. This Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred to quash the charge sheet dated 3.2.2010 submitted against applicant No.1, Anoop Sharma U/Ss 494,376,120-B, 504, 506 and 406 I.P.C., against applicant No. 2, P.L. Sharma, U/Ss 420 and 120-B I.P.C. and against applicant No.3, Mrs. Kamlesh Sharma U/Ss 420, 120-B and 406 I.P.C. as well as to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 630 of 2010, State Versus Anoon Sharma and others pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Dehradun. 2. The averments made in the application are that One Smt. Savitri Devi is engaged in collecting the advertisement for ‘Time of India’ where applicant No.1 was also working where they became friend and taking advantage of this friendship Savitri Devi has got prepared a marriage registration certificate in a forged manner. The applicant No.1 never got married with Savitri and he has married with the daughter of respondent No.2 on 11.2.2009 and due to conduct of Savitri Devi the matrimonial relations of applicant No.1 with the daughter of respondent No.2 became disturbed. It is also mentioned in the application that Smt. Savitri Devi was married with one Neeraj Verma, from whom she has one daughter Km. Varnika Verma born on 3.6.2000, but in a road accident Neeraj Verma died on 15.4.2006 and thereafter Smt. Savitri Devi is residing in her parental house at 120, Karanpur, Dehradun. 3. According to applicants, on 21.10.2009, at about 6.30 P.M. the respondent No.2 lodged a first information report against them with the allegations that he had published an advertisement for marriage of his daughter Avnish, thereafter applicants came to his house and by saying that applicant No.1 Anoop Sharma is a bachelor, solemnized the marriage of applicant No.1 with his daughter, but later on he came to know that the applicant No.1 Anoop Sharma is already married with one Smt. Savitri Devi, as such the applicant No.1 has committed rape with the daughter of respondent No.2 after cheating her and now the applicants are demanding the money from respondent No.2 and they are also not returning the Stridhan of his daughter Avnish. On the basis of F.I.R. case crime No. 236 of 2009 was registered at P.S. Dalanwala District Dehradun against the applicants U/Ss 494,376,420,120-B,504, 506 and 406 I.P.C. 4. On the basis of F.I.R. case crime No. 236 of 2009 was registered at P.S. Dalanwala District Dehradun against the applicants U/Ss 494,376,420,120-B,504, 506 and 406 I.P.C. 4. It is alleged in the petition that the matter has amicably been settled between applicants and respondent No.2 and stridhan was returned to respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 issued an account payee cheque No. 67783 dated 26.6.2009 of Rs. 3 lacks was issued in favour of respondent No.2 towards the expenses of marriage which was encashed by respondent No.2 on 29.6.2009. On 3.7.2009 Smt. Savitri Devi filed O.S. No. 258 of 2009 Smt. Savitri Devi Vs. Anoop Sharma and another in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun U/S 11 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for declaring the marriage solemnized between applicant No.1 and Avnish(daughter of respondent No.2) as null and void. The said petition has been dismissed by the Principal Judge, Family Court Dehradun vide order dated 23.2.2011, holding that the petitioner Smt. Savitri Devi has failed to establish that her marriage was solemnized with the applicant Anoop Sharma on 18.6.2007. 5. The Investigation was conducted by police on the F.I.R. lodged by respondent No.2 and after completing the investigation the police submitted charge sheet against the accused/applicants. Applicant Anoop Sharma was charge sheeted U/Ss 494, 376,120-B, 504, 506,406, 420 I.P.C.; applicant P.L. Sharma was charge sheeted U/Ss 420, 120-B I.P.C. and the third applicant Kamlesh Sharma was charge sheeted U/Ss 120-B, 420 and 406 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate took cognizance on the charge sheet vide order dated 8-3-2010 and criminal case was registered against the accused/applicants. 6. Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit. Along with counter affidavit photo copy of Marriage certificate between Mr. Anoop Sharma and Mrs. Savitri issued by Registrar of Hindu Marriage, Dehradun has been filed. He also filed the copies of statements of Sri S.D. Parasar complainant and his daughter Avnish recorded during investigation. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicants has submitted that the criminal proceedings pending against them is nothing but an abuse of process of law. The allegations made against the applicants by the respondent No.2, are baseless. When Anoop Sharma got married with Avnish daughter of respondent No.2, he was a bachelor and the marriage was solemnized with the consent of Avnish and her parents. The allegations made against the applicants by the respondent No.2, are baseless. When Anoop Sharma got married with Avnish daughter of respondent No.2, he was a bachelor and the marriage was solemnized with the consent of Avnish and her parents. It is a false allegation against Anoop Sharma that he was already married with Smt. Savitri Devi. The marriage certificate of Anoop Sharma and Smt. Savitri is a fabricated document. Smt. Savitri Devi had filed O.S. No. 258/2009 before Principal Judge, Family Court Dehradun U/S 11 of Hindu Marriage Act to declare the marriage of Anoop Sharma with Avnish as null and void on the ground that Anoop Sharma is already married with Smt. Savitri Devi and the learned Principle Judge has found that the marriage of Savitri Devi was not solemnized with Anoop Sharma and the marriage certificate filed by Smt. Savitri Devi is not proved beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly the suit was dismissed. Learned counsel also contended that marriage of Anoop Sharma with Avnish was solemnized in accordance with Hindu rights and she is only legally wedded wife of Anoop Sharma therefore, no offences are made out and the charge sheet as well as criminal proceedings against the accused/applicants are certainly abuse of process of law and liable to be quashed. 9. On the other hand learned Brief Holder contended that the complainant Sri H.D. Parasar and Mrs. Avnish have given evidence during investigation against the accused/applicants and prima facie offences are made out against them and the proceedings 482 Cr.P.C. the charge sheet as well as the criminal proceedings against the accused persons cannot be quashed. 10. Now it is to be seen whether there is sufficient material to constitute offences U/Ss 494, 376,120-B, 504, 506,406, 420 I.P.C. against applicant Anoop Sharma; U/Ss 420, 120-B I.P.C against applicant P.L. Sharma and U/Ss 120-B, 420 and 406 I.P.C. against applicant Kamlesh Sharma. 11. It is admitted case of the parties that marriage of applicant Anoop Sharma was solemnized with Avnish daughter of respondent No.2 in accordance with Hindu customs and with the consent of parties. 11. It is admitted case of the parties that marriage of applicant Anoop Sharma was solemnized with Avnish daughter of respondent No.2 in accordance with Hindu customs and with the consent of parties. The dispute between the parties arose when respondent No.2 got impression that Anoop Sharma was already married with Smt. Savitri Devi and only thereafter the relations of applicants side and respondent No.2 and his family became strained and the respondent No.2 lodged F.I.R. against the applicant Anoop Sharma that he being a married person had committed rape upon his daughter as he was already married person and charges of cheating, threats, criminal conspiracy etc were levelled against the applicants. 12. On the other hand the assertion of Anoop Sharma is that he and Smt. Savitri Devi were working in the same organization and they developed friendship and taking undue advantage of this friendship Savitri Verma got prepared a marriage registration certificate in a forged manner. He never got married with Savitri Devi and he only got married with Avnish daughter of respondent No.2 and due to conduct of Savitri Devi Verma, the matrimonial relations of the applicant and Avnish became disturbed and that was the reason that the F.I.R. was lodged by the father of Avnish on wrong assumption. 13. Smt. Savitri Devi in order to get the marriage between applicant Anoop Sharma and Avnish as null and void filed O.S. No. 258 of 2009 Smt. Savitri Devi Vs. Anoop Sharma and Avnish Parasad U/S 11 of Hindu Marriage Act before Principal Judge Family Court Dehradun. She also filed the photo copy of marriage certificate allegedly pertaining to her marriage with Anoop Sharma. Smt. Savitri Devi had asserted in the plaint that her marriage with Anoop Sharma was solemnized on 18.6.2007 and it was registered before Registrar, Hindu Marriage Office Dehradun on 7.1.2008 and at the time of her marriage she was widow and Anoop Sharma was bachelor and the marriage solemnized by Anoop Sharma with Avnish on 11.2.2009 is illegal. The applicant Anoop Sharma contested the suit and filed written statement wherein it was alleged that he never married with Savitri Devi and in order to blackmail him she has got prepared forged marriage certificate. He never took secret rounds in accordance with Hindu customs with Smt. Savitri Devi. The Principal Judge Family Court framed issues in the suit. The applicant Anoop Sharma contested the suit and filed written statement wherein it was alleged that he never married with Savitri Devi and in order to blackmail him she has got prepared forged marriage certificate. He never took secret rounds in accordance with Hindu customs with Smt. Savitri Devi. The Principal Judge Family Court framed issues in the suit. Issue No.4 was framed about the genuineness of photo copy of marriage certificate pertaining to the marriage of Savitri Devi with Anoop Sharma. Parties adduced evidence before the family court. The learned Family Court came to the conclusion that marriage of Smt. Savitri Devi with Anoop Sharma is not proved and the marriage certificate has also not been got proved and Savitri Devi could not prove in her on oath statement that she was married with Anoop Sharma. Smt. Savitri Devi in her statement has admitted this fact that prior to 7.1.2009 when the marriage certificate was obtained, her marriage did not take place with Anoop Sharma, whereas in the plaint it has been mentioned that her marriage with Anoop Sharma took place on 18.6.2007. Smt. Savitri Devi also admitted that marriage of Anoop Sharma was solemnized with Avnish on 11.2.1990 in accordance with Hindu customs. Thus marriage of Savitri Devi with Anoop Sharma could not be proved and by a decree of civil court it is proved that Anoop Sharma was not married with Savitri Devi and at the time of his marriage with Avnish he was bachelor. After marriage with Avnish it has come in evidence that he lived with Avnish as husband and wife. Thus it cannot be said that the accused/applicants had conspired and cheated the respondent No.2 and his daughter and committed the offence of marrying again during lifetime of a wife. 14. It has also come on record that Stridhan of Avnish has been returned to her and some amount has been given to respondent No.2 towards expenses of marriage and the dispute has been settled amicably between the parties. 15. Once it is proved that at the time of marriage with Avnish, applicant Anoop Sharma was a bachelor, then no offences are made out and if the criminal proceedings against the applicants are allowed to continue then it would certainly amount to abuse of process of law. 16. 15. Once it is proved that at the time of marriage with Avnish, applicant Anoop Sharma was a bachelor, then no offences are made out and if the criminal proceedings against the applicants are allowed to continue then it would certainly amount to abuse of process of law. 16. In view of foregoing discussions, in my opinion, it is a fit case where the charge sheet as well as the criminal proceedings against the accused/applicants are liable to be quashed. 17. The criminal misc. application is allowed. The charge sheet dated 3.2.2010 submitted against applicant No.1, Anoop Sharma U/Ss 494,376,120-B, 504, 506 and 406 I.P.C., against applicant No2, P.L. Sharma, U/Ss 420 and 120-B I.P.C. and against applicant No.3, Mrs. Kamlesh Sharma U/Ss 420, 120-B and 406 I.P.C. as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 630 of 2010, State Versus Anoop Sharma and others pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Dehradun are hereby quashed.