IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application(C482) No. 393 of 2011 1. Meera Bishwas W/o Vishwanath Bishwas 2. Vishwanath Bishwas S/o Keshar Bishwas Both R/o Village Pipaliya No. 1 Police Station Gadarpur P.O. Prem Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar ………..…Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Home Secretary Dehradun. 2. Phoolmala, W/o Dhroov Kumar R/o Village Pipaliya No. 1 Police Station Gadarpur P.O. Prem Nagar, Udham Singh Nagar ....……Respondents Shri D.C.S. Rawat, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Shri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the respondent no. 1/State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have sought quashing of the charge sheet which is registered as criminal 2 case no. 4062 of 2009, State vs. Dhroov Kumar & others, relating to offences punishable under section 494, 496, 498A, 376, 323, 506, 120B IPC, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that it is accused Dhroov Kumar who is said to have got married to Phoolmala without getting dissolved his marriage with his first wife Rakhi. It is pleaded that the petitioners are sister-in-law and brother-in- law of Dhroov Kumar. 4. In the first information report (for short F.I.R.), informant Phoolmala has alleged that the petitioners namely Meera Bishwas and Vishwanath Bishwas got settled marriage of Dhroov Kumar (brother of Meera) with the informant knowing well that he (Dhroov Kumar) was a married man. It is further alleged in the F.I.R., by the informant that by concealing his first marriage, rape has been committed on the informant by Dhroov. The complicity of the two petitioners is alleged in the FIR. 5. No doubt, the offences punishable under section 494 IPC, and one punishable under section 376 IPC, are not attracted as against the present 3 petitioners, for which Dhroov may or may not be responsible, but their complicity is required to be examined in connection with other offences by the the trial court. 6. In the above circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the trial of the case. Therefore, the petition is dismissed with the observation that if the petitioners Meera Bishwas and Vishwanath Bishwas surrender before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. It shall be kept in mind that the ingredients of the offences punishable under section 376 IPC, or that of 494 IPC, are not attracted as against the present petitioners. (Stay application no. 454 of 2011, stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 11.05.2011 Parul