SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Priyanka Atul Mishra vs Atul Lalmohan Mishra And Ors on 12 February, 2019

Sherla V.

wp.2495.2018.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2495 OF 2018

Smt.Priyanka Atul Mishra … Petitioner
Vs.
Shri Atul Lalmohan Mishra Ors. … Respondents

Mr.M.J. Bhatt for the Petitioner
Mr.S.S. Pednekar, APP, for the Respondent – State

CORAM: Mrs.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 2019

P.C.:

1. This Writ Petition is directed against the order dated

12.4.2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Thane in

Criminal Appeal No.246 of 2014 rejecting the application filed for

leading additional evidence in appeal filed under section 391 of the

Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner/appellant is the original

complainant who has filed a criminal case against the

respondent/original accused under sections 494 and 498A of the

Indian Penal Code. The respondents/accused are acquitted from

all the charges by the learned Judge against which the Criminal

Appeal No.246 of 2014 was filed by the original complainant i.e.,

the petitioner. The application was moved under section 391 of the

Criminal Procedure Code that the original complainant be allowed

Page 1 of 2

::: Uploaded on – 13/02/2019 14/02/2019 00:18:34 :::
wp.2495.2018.doc

to lead evidence of photocopy of the voters’ list wherein the two

names i.e., of the respondent/original accused and his second wife

are mentioned. The said application was rejected by the learned

Sessions Judge and hence, this Writ Petition.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that if

at all the petitioner is allowed to lead evidence of the said voters’

list then, she will be in a position to prove the fact of second

marriage. He further submitted that this will enable the petitioner

to lead evidence of second marriage by calling the concerned

witnesses.

3. Perused the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge;

considered the nature of offence and the evidence which the

petitioner intends to lead. In view of section 494 of the Indian

Penal Code, strict proof of second marriage is required. Hence,

only photocopy of the voters’ list cannot be considered to be a

relevant evidence on this point. The reasoning given by the

learned Sessions Judge is found correct and legal. No interference

is required. The petition is summarily dismissed.

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Page 2 of 2

::: Uploaded on – 13/02/2019 14/02/2019 00:18:34 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation