Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tapas Dinda & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal on 29 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
The Hon'ble JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
CRR 207 of 2022
CRAN 3 of 2022
Tapas Dinda & Anr.
-Vs-
The State of West Bengal
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajdeep Mazumdar, Adv.,
Mr. Pritam Ray, Adv.,
For the Sate: Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Adv.,
Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee, Adv.,
Heard on: 29 June, 2022.
Judgment on: 29 June, 2022.
BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J. : -
1.
Petitioners are the FIR named accused persons of Nandakumar
Police Station Case No.364 of 2021 dated 31st August, 2021 under
Sections 341/323/354/506/509/34 of the IPC corresponding to G.R
Case No.2235 of 2021, presently pending before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Purba Medinipur.
2. In the instant application the petitioners have prayed for quashing
of the aforesaid case instituted against them on the basis of a written
complaint submitted by one Sushama Midya.
3. It is not in dispute that opposite party No.2/defacto complainant is
a Gram Panchyat Member and she was distributing forms of Duare
Sarkar Project in her personal capacity. Over the said issue, a dispute
cropped up between the opposite party No.2 and the petitioners because
Duare Sarkar forms are to be distributed by the Block Development
Officer. The petitioners were mercilessly beaten by the opposite party No.2
and his men and agents on 24th August, 2021. Petitioner No.1 lodged a
complaint in the local P.S on the basis of which Nandakumar Police
Station Case No.363 of 2021 dated 30th August, 2021 under Sections
341/323/325/379/506/34 of the IPC was registered. It is alleged by the
petitioners that subsequent case initiated by the opposite party No.2 is
out and out a false case. The petitioner No.1 was severely assaulted on
24th August, 2021. He was medically treated at Purba Medinipur District
Hospital as an injured patient. He was discharged from the hospital in
28th October, 2021 and immediately after his discharge the opposite party
No.2 filed a written complaint with an allegation that on 29th August,
2021 the accused persons wrongfully restrained her, assaulted her,
outraged her modesty and intimated her.
4. This Court has heard submission made by Mr. Rajdeep Mazumdar
on behalf of the petitioners and the learned P.P-in-Charge. The learned
P.P-in-Charge has also submitted the copy of the case diary of
Nandakumar Police Station Case No.364 of 2021. On careful perusal of
the case diary, it is asserted that on 29th August, 2022, the opposite party
No.2 received injury on her chest and she was medically treated at
Khejurberia Block Primary Health Centre. The Medical Officer found
multiple nail scratch marks on both sides of the chest of the opposite
party. The case of the defacto complainant was corroborated by other
witnesses whose statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The
defacto complainant/opposite party No.2, however, was not agreeable to
make a statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C during investigation.
5. The learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that falsity of the
prosecution case is apparent when the defacto complainant refused to
make any statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C.
6. I am not in a position to accept such submission made by Mr.
Mazumdar, the learned Advocate for the petitioners. A charge-sheet
cannot be quashed on the ground of defacto complainant's refusal to get
her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The prosecution
case may be proved by the documents and materials collected by the
Investigating Officer in course of investigation.
7. There is no ground to quash the proceeding in Nandakumar Police
Station Case No.364 of 2021 and G.R case No.2235 of 2021 under
Sections 341/323/354/506/509/34 of the IPC.
8. The instant revisional application is accordingly dismissed on
contest, however without costs.
9. A copy of this judgment be sent to the court below.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)
