THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.7213 of 2009 DATED:09.09.2009 Between: Challa Pushpalatha .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderaband and another .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD CRIMINAL PETITION No.7213 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri P.Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the first respondent. No notice is being ordered to the second respondent, as the matter is being disposed of, at the stage of admission. A private complaint was filed by the second respondent against the petitioner and another alleging that the second respondent was married to the first accused and the first accused developed illicit intimacy with the petitioner, who is his brother’s wife. She also further alleged that accused Nos.1 and 2 underwent a ceremony of marriage, evidenced by some photographs and letters, and therefore, she files the complaint in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 323, 494 and 497 of the Indian Penal Code. This complaint was referred to by the Court to the police for investigation under Sections 156(3) and 155(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and was registered citing the same Sections of law. The petitioner now approaches this Court with this Criminal Petition contending that Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code cannot apply to her and that even in respect of Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code, no witness was cited in proof of her marriage with the first accused and specific evidence is required to prove such second marriage with reference to Section 50 of the Evidence Act and the petitioner therefore, desires the entire proceedings to be quashed. Insofar as, Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the contentions of the petitioner appear to have some force, but the present stage of the proceedings is only registration of the First Information Report under some penal provisions and the statutory investigating agency is investigating into the same on the reference of the private complaint by the Court for such purpose. It is only on collection of evidence by the investigating agency during such investigation that the investigating officer will be able to come to a prima facie conclusion on the culpability or otherwise of any person for any specified offence and it would be suffice to caution the investigating officer about the legal objection taken by the petitioner insofar as any scope for involving her in an offence under Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code. However, insofar as the presence or the absence of any evidence for satisfactorily proving any second marriage between both the accused is concerned, that will be a matter of evidence, which the investigating agency may be able to collect during further investigation and the same will depend upon what evidence the second respondent will be able to provide to the investigating agency during the course of such investigation. The private complaint or the First Information Report need not have been an encyclopaedia of such details and though the allegations in the complaint per se appear to be devoid of any such details, quashing the proceedings on such ground will be premature and unjust. Whether any marriage ceremony has been performed between the accused which brings such ceremony within the scope of Section 494 of the Indian Penal Code and as to who were the witnesses to any such marriage etc., are matters which involve issues of fact and in a restricted and summary enquiry under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this Court will not convert itself into a fact finding forum. The inherent jurisdiction is available only in the rarest of rate cases and it cannot be exercised in favour of the petitioner in the present case. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed, but the Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Bheemavaram, West Godavari District shall be communicated a copy of this order so as to know the objections of the petitioner about the inapplicability of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code to her and to take further action during further investigation in accordance with law concerning such an objection. ___________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J 9th September 2009 KH