Case Facts:
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1862 of 2008 (4) dt.18-10-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.1862 of 2008 ====================================================== 1. Sanjay Kumar Paswan 2. Sandip Kumar 3. Pradip Kumar 4. Rajgrih Ram 5. Phoolvarti Devi .... .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Reshmi Kumari .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioners : Mr. Brijnandan Pd. Sharma For the State: Mr. Sunil Kr. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH ORAL ORDER 4 18-10-2012 This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 6.10.2007 passed in Mehdiganj P. S. Case No. 5/2007, G R No. 809/2007 by Sri S.N.Srivastava, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City by which cognizance has been taken for the offence under [STATUTE] . Heard learned counsel for the parties. Allegation against the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 came in contact with the informant. She was requesting to marry him. Any how in the month of October, 2006 at Hanuman temple she was brought and vermilion was put on her head, thereafter accepting her as wife, she was taken to Delhi also but later was Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1862 of 2008 (4) dt.18-10-2012 refused on pretext to marry with another girl. The act of the parties if can be recognized as married then only any offence is made out. Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides about solemnization of marriage if is performed in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto. In absence of family members of both the parties making relation secret putting of vermilion can never be accepted customary rites or ceremonies of the parties otherwise it would amount to give a certificate to immoral act also for relation of male and female. Relation of male and female to any extent may not be a crime may be accepted as live-in- relationship which the society is accepting but never can be accepted for completion/performance of marriage specifically for fixing criminal liability, not against counter part rather to his family members. Proceeding appears malicious not liable to sustain. In the discussed facts and circumstances of the case, the quashing application is allowed and the order of cognizance dated 6.10.2007 is hereby quashed. A.I./- (Mandhata Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 494

Statute Text:
Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. Marrying again during the life-time of a husband or wife. Whoever, having a husband or wife living, marries in any case in which such marriage is void by reason of its taking place during the life of such husband or wife, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.