Sunny Bharat Kothari & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 4654 Cal

07.09.2021 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.149 CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION Ct.No.34 dc.

C.R.R. 969 of 2020 (Via Video Conference)

Sunny Bharat Kothari & Ors.

versus The State of West Bengal & Anr.

In Re: An Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Mr. Santanu Maji, Ms. Snigdha Saha, Mr. Pronoy Basak ... For the Petitioners.

Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Mr. Dipankar Paramanick ... For the State.

Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the

petitioners has challenged the charge-sheet which has been

filed by the investigating agency in connection with Durgapur

Police Station Case No. 311 of 2018 dated 10.07.2018 under

Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the

learned advocate, the deceased was a drunkard and as such,

committed suicide for which neither the daughter nor the

alleged son-in-law or the wife could be held responsible.

According to him, the prosecution evidence does not transpire

any material so far the present petitioners are concerned so

as to ask them to face the ordeal of trial. The learned

advocate draws the attention of this Court to the suicide note

and submits that the same also fails to implicate the present

petitioners. The learned advocate for the petitioners relies

upon two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court - (i) Sanju

alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P. reported in (2002)

5 Supreme Court Cases 371 and (ii) Subha Narayan Vs. State

of West Bengal & Ors. reported in (2006) 3 CHN 651. By

relying upon Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar (supra),

learned advocate draws the attention to paragraphs 12 and

13 of the said judgment and by referring to the contents of

the suicide note submits that the present suicide note also

does not implicate the petitioners and the interpretation so

made by the Hon'ble Apex Court is squarely applicable to this

case.

The learned advocate for the petitioners by referring to

Subha Narayan (supra) draws the attention of this Court to

paragraphs 13 and 14 and submits that it is not enough that

the victim was subjected to some harassment or used to be

criticised which would be sufficient to attract the provision of

Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

Mr. Sur, learned advocate appearing for the State, on

the other hand, has referred to the suicide note as also the

statement recorded under Section 164 of the other daughter

of the deceased.

I have perused the case diary, the statement of the

witnesses and other materials so collected by the

investigating agency in order to arrive at a conclusion for

alleged commission of offence under Sections 306/34 of the

Indian Penal Code. In the instant case, the brother of the

deceased made a complaint wherein he has narrated

regarding the apprehension expressed by the deceased just

few days prior to commission of suicide. The same is

corroborated by the contents of the suicidal note as stated

therein as also the statement made by one Nemisha Merry

James recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure i.e. the torture being inflicted by the other sister.

The statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure relied upon by the prosecution also

reflects complicity of the present petitioners. The fact that the

petitioner no.1 has been shown to be an outsider cannot be of

any use in view of the fact that his name is also appearing in

some of the statements recorded under Section 161 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure.

I am of the prima facie view that the prosecution has

been able to make out a case for proceeding with the trial.

There may be a good case after the trial is over, but at this

stage when the court has to decide between some suspicion

and grave suspicion, I am of the view that no interference is

called for. Accordingly, CRR 969 of 2020 is dismissed.

Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

All pending connected applications, if any, are

consequently disposed of.

The learned trial court would from the next specified

date so fixed complete the trial within a year by fixing at least

three dates each and every month.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)