Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Baishali Dutta vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 20 April, 2022
20.04. 2022
item No.20
n.b.
ct. no. 34
CRR 3176 of 2019
Smt. Baishali Dutta
Vs.
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Md. Shahjahan Hossain,
Ms. Sanjida Sultana,
Mr. Prithwiraj Biswas
.....for the opposite party no.2
Mr. Imran Ali,
Ms. Debjani Sahu
.....for the State
The present revisional application has been preferred
challenging the Judgment and Order dated September 5, 2019
passed by the Learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court at Calcutta
in connection with criminal revision no.156 of 2019, wherein the
Learned revisional Court was pleased to set aside the order dated
28.5.2019 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 12 th
Court Calcutta in connection with the G.R No.127 of 2017 arising
out of Bowbazar Police Station case no.37 of 2017 dated 3.2.2017.
Records of the revisional application reflects that on the
basis of complaint addressed to the Officer in Charge Bowbazar
Police Station by one Smt. Baishali Dutta wife of Mr. Pulak Dutta,
Bowbazar Police Station No.37 of 2017 dated February 3, 2017 was
registered for investigation under Sections 504/506(ii)/509/34 of
the Indian Penal Code. The police authorities on conclusion of
investigation submitted charge sheet dated 21.9.2017 before the
2
Learned ACMM, Calcutta. It is relevant to state that although the
complainant could not name any person and the formal FIR had to
be registered against unknown accused persons using Mobile SIM
nos.7605817252 and 7449697154, the charge sheet was submitted
against one Shri Probhas Ghosh and Smt. Priyanka Das (Opposite
Parties nos. 2 and 3 herein). On such charge sheet being filed
against the accused persons and copies under section 207 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure being served, an application under
Section 239 of the Code of Criminal procedure was preferred at the
instance of the accused persons. The learned Magistrate after
consideration of the statement under Section 161 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure and under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure along with relevant documents was pleased to hold that
a case has been made out under the provisions of Sections
504/506/509
of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and with such observations the Metropolitan
Magistrate was pleased to reject the prayer for discharge.
The opposite party nos. 2 and 3 being aggrieved preferred
a revisional application before the Learned Chief Judge, City
Sessions Court at Calcutta against the said order dated 28.5.2019.
Similar arguments were advanced before the Learned Chief Judge,
City Sessions Court at Calcutta and the Learned Chief Judge, City
Sessions Court at Calcutta after considering the materials
appearing in the Case Diary as well as records, based his findings
independently of the order passed by the Learned Magistrate. The
Learned Chief Judge categorically observed that the Police
Authorities in the charge sheet has relied upon three witnesses and
the Investigating officer of the case. So far as the documents are
concerned, some photographs have been relied upon. Learned Chief
Judge on a perusal of the materials appearing in the case records,
was of the opinion that the two vital witnesses of the case happens
to be Saumitra Biswas and one Arpan Dutta. According to him
Saumitra Biswas was running a Telecommunicatin Shop and
selling SIM Cards of different service providers and he sold the SIM
Card bearing connection No.7605817252 to one Prabhsh Ghosh
that is one of the accused persons but the application form
reflected that the SIM Card was in the name of one Abhijit
Bhattacharya. So far the other witness is concerned namely, Arpan
Dutta, he stated that he had affair with the accused Priyanka Das.
The accused namely, Prabhas Ghosh being a colleague, on request
gave his SIM Card to Priyanka Das, the other accused. Apart from
such oral assertions nothing is appearing on the records. So far as
the call recording details are concerned, although they were
collected as has been submitted on behalf of the State, such huge
number of papers as are appearing in the Case Diary but no
documents are there as to how the same was officially obtained
from the service providers.
Astonishingly, such documents have not been also relied
upon by the prosecution to establish its case before the Learned
Trial Court. The foundation of the complaint is based on the fact
that the complainant received phone calls which have been from
unknown persons from the numbers stated therein, by whom she
was insulted and abused in filthy language. No chain of
circumstances appears so far as the said mobile numbers are
concerned with the persons who have been made accused and no
documents have been relied upon by the prosecution regarding the
authenticity of the call detail records. The manner in which the
petitioners have been implicated as an accused by way of oral
testimonies of witnesses do not appear to be convincing materials
for causing interference in the order dated September 5, 2019
passed by the Learned Chief Judge, City Sessions Court at Calcutta
in criminal revision No.156 of 2019 dated 5.9.2019 and thus the
said order hereby affirmed.
Accordingly, the revisional application being CRR 3176 of
2019 is dismissed.
All pending connected applications, if any, are
consequently disposed of.
Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.
However, the complainant would be at liberty to adduce
her own evidence before a Court of law if any case is filed with
similar allegations under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
The Case Diary be returned to the Learned Advocate
appearing for the State.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
( Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
