Dismissed

Suresh Kumar Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Mar 2022CRMP/436/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought to quash a charge sheet alleging bigamy and cruelty under IPC, claiming his first marriage was customary and invalid. The court held the validity of customarily married status is a matter of defence for trial, dismissed the petition, instructed the petitioner to raise defences in trial, and noted he may still be married validly.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed without merits; petitioner directed to raise all defences before the trial court.

Suresh Kumar Banjare Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 436 of 2022

¶5

Suresh Kumar Banjare S/o Late Mannu Lal Banjare Aged About 41 Years R/o Village- Kareli, Police Station- Bori, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh through- Police Station- Bori, DistrictDurg, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Smt. Heeramani Banjare W/o Suresh Banjare Aged About 36 Years R/o Navagaon, Near Upleta, Rice Mill, Ward No. 22, Mungeli, Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, DistrictMungeli, Chhattisgarh........ Complainant. --- Respondents

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Pushpendra Kr. Patel, Advocate. For the State/R-1 : Mr. Ayaz Naved, Panel Lawyer.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶11

Order on Board

¶12

11.03.2022

¶13

In this petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner seeks to quash the Charge Sheet relating to Crime No.78/2001 which has been initiated at the behest of Respondent no.2 Smt. Hiramani Banjare wherein it is alleged that she was married to the Petitioner on 25.06.2020 according to the Hindu rituals and at that time sufficient gifts were given. She started living with her husband at village Kareli. Subsequently, she came to know that earlier the husband has already married to one Devantin Banjari about 10 years back. When she enquired the matter and asked the petitioner about the first marriage, she was abused and in turn dowry of Rs.5 lakhs was demanded, therefore, the report was made.

¶14

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that only on assumption, the case u/s 494 read with section 498-A of IPC has been registered. He would submit that even if the statement of earlier wife is examined, it would show that she was not legally wedded wife and according to Churi custom, she was married. Therefore, the first marriage cannot be considered as a legal marriage, consequently the wife would also not get the status, therefore, the charge is liable to be quashed.

¶16

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the arguments and read out the statement of Devantin Bai as also the statement of complainant Smt. Heeramani Banjari.

¶17

Perused the statement of Heeramani Banjari, complainant/ respondent no.2 herein. It would reveal from her statement that after marriage she was pressurized to get money for purchase of a house and she was also pressurized to get finance to liquidate a loan of the husband to the extent of Rs.5 lakhs. Apart from this demand, she came to know that earlier one Dewantin Banjari was married to the petitioner and having enquired from her mobile, she revealed that 9-10 years back, she was married to the petitioner and for the last 1 year, the husband-petitioner is staying separately, therefore, she has filed a case for maintenance. Having confronted with the first marriage, the complainant was abused and assaulted and aggravated the demand of dowry.

¶18

The statement of Dewantin Bai is also enclosed with the charge sheet. She also fortifies the fact that she was married to the present petitioner 9-10 years back according to the custom in the year 2011.

¶19

¶20

Having considered the statements of both complainant and Dewantin Bai, prima facie, I do not find any valid ground which comes to rescue of the petitioner. The submission of the petitioner that the first marriage was not legal is a matter of defence inasmuch as the customary marriage is also allowed under certain circumstances. Therefore, in exercise of the power under Section 482 of CrPC, no finding can be given by this Court that the first marriage was performed according to the Churi custom, therefore, the second marriage would be a valid one. The charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, the petitioner may raise all the defence before the trial Court. The petition sans merit and is accordingly dismissed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE

¶23

Rao

Suresh Kumar Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar Banjare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saraswati Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Navjeet Singh Tuteja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Jalodar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Awadhram Thakur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mohit Sonkar Vs State of Chhattisgarh