CHARUSHILA W/O PRABHAKAR PARDESHIversusPARABHAKAR GABA PARDESHI

2026:BHC-AUG:41330


                                                                            ALP-55-2025
                                                    -1-

                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                     APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL BY PRIVATE PARTY NO. 55 OF 2025

                 Charushila w/o Prabhakar Pardeshi
                 Age : 41 years, Occu : Household,
                 R/o. Plot No.16, “Anurag”, State Bank Colony,
                 Jalgaon, Taluka and District Jalgaon.           … Applicant
                                                           [Orig. Complainant]
                       Versus

                 Prabhakar S/o Gaba Pardeshi
                 Age : 53 years, Occu : Primary Teacher,
                 R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Lendane,
                 Taluka Malegaon, District Nashik.                  … Respondent
                                                                    [Orig. Accused]
                                                …..
                 Mr. Yogeshwar L. Bidve, Advocate for the Applicant.
                 Mr. Umesh Mitkari h/f Mr. Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for the
                 Respondent.
                                                 .....

                                           CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
                                           Reserved on   : 04.09.2026
                                           Pronounced on : 08.09.2026

                 ORDER :


                 1.      This leave to file appeal is directed against the judgment and

                 order of acquittal dated 06.03.2024 passed by learned Joint JMFC,

                 Jalgaon in RCC No. 32 of 2001, acquitting respondent herein from

                 charge under Section 494 of IPC.



                 2.      Proceedings were instituted by present applicant before learned

                 trial court on the premise that, she was married to respondent on

                 23.03.2008 as per customs and rituals. That, said marriage was still in
                                                           ALP-55-2025
                                  -2-

existence. On 01.05.2013, accused drove her out and therefore she

filed proceedings under Section 125 CrPC as well as under the

provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005 (DV Act) and she is receiving maintenance and also stood

beneficiaries of other reliefs. That, during pendency of such

proceedings, respondent performed second marriage with one Sunita

and thereby he committed offence under Section 494 IPC, and hence

she filed complaint. It is also submitted that, respondent also has two

children from his second marriage.


      Apart form her own evidence, applicant adduced evidence of

PW2 in support of birth of child out of second marriage of

respondent. However, learned trial court held that there is no proof of

second marriage and essential ingredients of Section 494 IPC being

not made out, accused (present respondent) has been acquitted.



3.    Feeling aggrieved by the above, applicant intends to prefer

appeal and hence, instant leave application.



4.    Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that,

applicant’s case that she was married to accused was duly proved by

adducing cogent and reliable evidence. That accused, during

subsistence of first marriage, performed marriage with another lady
                                                            ALP-55-2025
                                   -3-

and thereby committed offence under Section 494 IPC. That, there

was also evidence about child born from the second marriage

performed by the respondent with another lady. According to learned

counsel, all ingredients to attract the offence were available but there

is incorrect appreciation on the part of the trial court. According to

him, there is good case in appeal and hence, by seeking reliance on

the judgment of the Delhi High Court in MAT.APP.(F.C.)317/2023

dated 27.08.2025, leave is urged for.


5.    Learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned

judgment and order to be just, legal and proper, and for want of

merits, prays to reject the application.


6.    perused the record. In support of her own marriage, present

applicant had adduced her own evidence. Applicant has also adduced

evidence of employee of Tongaonkar Hospital. Admittedly, there is no

proof of second marriage either in the form of wedding card or any

form of evidence to demonstrate marriage. Moreover, it seems that

she was not in a position to state even the very details of second

marriage of accused.


7.    Law is well-settled that to bring home the offence under Section

494 of IPC, the first as well as the second marriage alleged should be
                                                         ALP-55-2025
                                     -4-

proved in accordance with the legal requirements under Hindu Law

and under caste, custom of the particular accused. Absence of proof

regarding solemnization of any marriage of any one of these two

marriages would automatically defeat the charge under Section 494

of the IPC.


8.    In the instant case, there is no evidence that respondent

performed second marriage. PW2 is examined to demonstrate birth of

a child out of second marriage of the respondent but, as pointed out,

it is emerging from the cross of PW2 that the extract Exhibit 48 are

not filled by respondent or his alleged second wife and it does not

bear delivery register number as well as dates of admission and

discharge. This witness PW2 seems to have admitted that he was not

carrying original delivery register.


9.    In view of the above, no good ground being made out to accord

leave, following order is passed :

                                 ORDER

I.    Leave refused.

II.   The Application is dismissed.



                                           [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]

vre