Liberty was also granted to appear within one month from the date of order before the trial companyrt and to obtain bail.
On 6.12.1994 respondent filed a private companyplaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi wherein all the appellants were arrayed as accused persons.
Background facts in a nutshell are as under Daughter of the respondent namely Madhulika Singh was married to appellant No.1 Priya Vrat Singh.
On 1.6.1995 learned Special CJM, Varanasi issued summons.
It was alleged that in 21.2.1993 appellant No.1 had re married in Sankat Mochan Mandir, Varanasi.
However, the same was rejected by order dated 9.8.1996.
896 of 1994 subsequently numbered as Criminal Case No.
Time for filing appeal against the ex parte decree dated 1.1.1993 under Section 28 4 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 in short the Marriage Act expired on 31.1.1993.
According to the appellants, Madhulika started behaving rudely with her husband and his family members as Priya Vrat was unemployed.
On 21.2.1993 after dissolution of marriage, appellant No.1 re married one Neha alias Sunita at Jalgaon in Maharashtra on 2.3.1993.
Allegations of dowry harassment were also made.
The prayer was rejected by the High Court being of the view that the trial companyrt can be directed to companyclude the trial expeditiously and at the time of framing charges, the appellants can raise such points as has been raised in the present dispute.
On 9.8.1996, appellants moved an application before the learned Special CJM, Varanasi, and protested to the summoning order.
931 of 1995 relating to alleged companymission of offences punishable under Sections 494, 120B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC and Sections 3 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in short the Dowry Act pending in the Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.
188 of 1992 in the Civil Court at Barabanki for dissolution of marriage between him and Madhulika on the ground of cruelty and harassment meted out to him by Madhulika.
1 with appellant No.
P.C. was filed which was numbered as Criminal Misc.
In the meantime, appellant No.1 filed a suit in Original Suit No.
On 25.10.2001 the High Court dismissed the Criminal Misc.
The said suit was decreed on 1.1.1993 ex parte in favour of appellant No.1.
She thereafter started giving repeated threats to companymit suicide and appellant was seriously harassed.
From 16.7.1992 onwards appellant No.1 and Madhulika started living separately in the same house.
On 24.9.1996 petition under Section 482 Cr.
Tension between two reached to such an extent that Madhulika tried to companymit suicide on 7.3.1992.
However, shortly thereafter Madhulika left her matrimonial house and started living in the parental house.
Long thereafter, on 9.7.1996 Madhulika filed a Restoration Petition before the Civil Judge for recalling the order of ex parte.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the application filed in terms of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in short the Cr.
Appellants have filed the petition for quashing criminal proceeding against them in Complaint Case No.
In support of the appeal learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the marriage of appellant No.
