TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the second petition for quashing the criminal proceedings was maintainable despite the earlier withdrawal of a similar application. (ii) Whether the criminal case arising from the allegations of bigamy and allied offences deserved to be quashed as an abuse of the process of law.
Issue (i): Whether the second petition for quashing the criminal proceedings was maintainable despite the earlier withdrawal of a similar application.
Analysis: The petition was a successive invocation of the High Court's inherent and supervisory jurisdiction. The earlier application had been withdrawn, but the Court found that the situation had materially changed because the proceedings had remained substantially stagnant for a long period and the present challenge arose from the continued prosecution in the same complaint. In such circumstances, the bar against a second approach did not prevent the Court from examining whether continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process and whether intervention was necessary to secure the ends of justice.
Conclusion: The second petition was maintainable and could be entertained on the facts of the case.
Issue (ii): Whether the criminal case arising from the allegations of bigamy and allied offences deserved to be quashed as an abuse of the process of law.
Analysis: The Court noted that the complainant had initiated multiple criminal and civil proceedings over the years, and the earlier proceedings had ended in acquittal or adverse findings for the complainant. The allegation of bigamy rested only on an assertion that another woman was seen at the petitioner's house and was introduced as his wife. The Court held that such material did not establish the essential ingredient of a second marriage, namely, solemnization with proper ceremonies and due form. Admission alone was insufficient to prove marriage in a bigamy prosecution. In the absence of prima facie evidence of the alleged second marriage, and in view of the broader pattern of repeated litigation, continuation of the criminal case was found to serve no useful purpose.
Conclusion: The criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed.
Final Conclusion: The complaint and all orders passed in the criminal case were set aside, and the prosecution was brought to an end in order to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.
Ratio Decidendi: Inherent jurisdiction may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings, including in a successive petition, where the allegations do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offence and continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse of process and serve no legitimate purpose.
TaxTMI 
