1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1619 of 2010 Laxman s/o Ashruji Panjarkar and others V/s. The State of Maharashtra through P.S.O. Police Station, Malegaon, Dist. Washim and others ........................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Mr. Rahul Ghuge, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. K. L. Dharmadhikari, APP for the Respondent No.1 CORAM : A. P. BHANGALE, J. DATE : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2011. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants prayed for quashing the complaint bearing Misc. C. C. No. 41/2010 instituted by respondent No. 2 – wife of applicant no.1, which is pending before learned J.M.F.C., Malegaon. The accusations/offence punishable under Sections 494 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears, that 2 by the impugned order dated 13/07/2010, learned J.M.F.C., Malegaon, who after going through the complaint, verification and evidence before him, was pleased to find sufficient ground to proceed against the accused Nos. 1 to 3, 7 and 13 to 15, thus, process was issued against them. The accusations are that the applicant No. 1, who behaved with cruelty to his wife and entered into second illegal marriage on 15/05/2010, with another woman, while the first marriage was still subsisting. According to complainant, the applicant No. 1 – Laxman and Seema d/o Haribhau Phaltankar, underwent second illegal marriage, while marriage of Laxman was subsisting with Sangeeta (the respondent No. 2 herein). The complainant alleged the marriage ceremony which was witnessed in presence of certain persons. Under these circumstances, it appears that the process was issued against some of the accused namely accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7 and 13 to 15, under Sections 494 read with 109 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner, that before the second marriage of the applicant no. 1, divorce decree was passed. Learned Advocate for the respondent no. 2, immediately refuted this contention 3 stating that the ex-parte divorce obtained by the applicant no. 1 was set aside by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana, by order dated 08/08/2011. Under these circumstances, I think that the proceedings in which process was issued against certain accused pursuant to the complaint alleged by respondent No. 2, ought to proceed to it's logical end. 3. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. Even otherwise inherent powers under Section 482 are to be used sparingly and in exceptional cases. I do not find any extraordinary reason to interfere with the order of issuance of process by the impugned order. Application is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE Punde