Shilak Sarkar vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3131 Cal

             IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
            CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
                     APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
                              CRR 3473 of 2019
                                   With
                               CRAN 2 of 2022

                                  Shilak Sarkar
                                       Vs.
                         The State of West Bengal & anr.


For the petitioners:           Mr. Arindam Sen
                               Mr. Shibasis Chatterjee

For the State                  Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee
                               Ms. Debjani Sahu

For the opposite Party         Mr. Rwitendra Banerjee
                               Mr. Devdutta Pathak

Heard on:                      07th June, 2022

Judgment on:                   09th June, 2022


Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.

1. This is an application for quashing of Bidhannagar Police Station case

no. 77 of 2018 dated 6.9.2018 corresponding to GR case no. 771 of 2018 under

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that on 9.12.2019, the

petitioner got married to opposite party no. 2 as per Hindu rites and customs

and it was duly registered. On August 2, 2018, the defacto-complainant all on

a sudden entered into a severe quarrel with the petitioner and also caused

damage to several house articles and thereafter she left the matrimonial home

and forcefully took away the minor child of the petitioner. Mother of the

petitioner lodged a complaint which was registered as GDE no. 1356 dated

28.8.2018. the opposite party no. 2 refused to come back to matrimonial home

but on 6.9.2018 she lodged a frivolous complaint before the Bidhannagar

Police Station against the petitioner and on the basis of such complaint,

Bidhannagar Police Station case no. 77 of 2018 dated 6.9.2018 corresponding

to GR case no. 671 of 2018 under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was

initiated against the petitioner. The petitioner initially prayed for quashing of

the entire proceeding as according to the petitioner the said proceeding is

harassive and also because proceeding is being dragged unnecessarily and that

the ingredients under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are not attracted.

3. During pendency of the application both the parties by filing an affidavit

prayed for passing appropriate order being CRAN 2 of 2022 wherein they have

stated that during pendency of the proceeding a compromise degree has been

passed in an Act VIII proceeding between the parties and it has been mutually

agreed that the custody of the child shall remain with the applicant no. 2. The

disputes and differences between the parties has been resolved amicably and

as such there is no justifiable reason in continuing the present proceeding in

the interest of justice. It is further submitted on oath by both applicant nos. 1

and 2 that there is no reasonable likelihood of the applicant no. 2 impleaded as

accused in connection with the present case, to be convicted under Section

498-A of the Indian Penal Code as complained of, since the applicant no. 1 will

not depose against the applicant no.2 on the score of mutual settlement. The

defacto-complainant also not interested to proceed with the said case and for

which they have filed this joint application for compromise on oath.

4. State is represented and learned counsel for the State submits that state

has nothing to say about the amicable settlement arrived at by and between

the parties.

5. When the parties have compromised the issue and the complainant

categorically submitted that she does not want to prosecute the revisionist

continuation of criminal proceeding would be an abuse of the process of the

court.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and also

relying upon the ratio as laid down in the B.S. Joshi & ors., Vs. State of

Haryana & anr (2003) 4 SCC 675 and also considering the fact that there

being not even remote chance of conviction and also considering the fate of

trial, in view of defacto complainant's statement on oath that he will not

depose against present petitioner, I find that this is a fit case where invoking

power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the entire

proceeding should be quashed.

7. In view of the above, the entire proceeding being GR case no. 771 of 2018

under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed.

Accordingly, CRR 3473 of 2019 along with CRAN 2 of 2022 are disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs .

Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied to

the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE)