Sandip Roy Choudhury vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 7897 Cal

Form J(1)        IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                    Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
                               Appellate Side


Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri


                               CRR 2547 of 2022

                              Sandip Roy Choudhury
                                      Vs.
                          The State of West Bengal & Anr.



            Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya
            Mr. Shubhojyoti Dutta
            Ms. Swati Bhattacharya
                  ..for the petitioner



Item No. 15.


Heard & Judgment on:           29.11.2022


Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner

that as per F.I.R. the de facto complainant was the married wife

of the petitioner. Their marriage was solemnized in the year

2013 and it was dissolved in the year 2016. Two years after

divorce the petitioner again prayed for mercy and wanted to

stay with the de facto complainant together. The de facto

complainant allowed. They started living like husband and wife

and during such relationship the de facto complainant gave birth

to a girl child. It is alleged that after the birth of the said girl

child the petitioner physically assaulted her time and again and

also wrongfully confined her.

On the basis of the said complaint Sonarpur Police Station

Case No.929 of 2020 dated 13th November, 2020 was registered

and on completion of investigation police submitted charge sheet

under Sections 341/323/354 of the Indian Penal Code. It is

submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that when a

grown up and major man and woman voluntarily live together

and as a result of such living the woman gives birth to a child

there cannot be any allegation under Section 354 of the Indian

Penal Code. If the penal provision of Section 354 of the Indian

Penal Code is left out, remaining allegations are non-cognizable

in nature. Therefore, the criminal proceeding may be quashed. It

is ascertained from the submission made by the learned

advocate for the petitioner that the learned advocate has raised

a question of competency of a police officer to investigate into

the case on the basis of the F.I.R. submitted by the de facto

complainant.

It is needless to say that if the Investigating Officer at the

time of registration of a police case is of the view that some

cognizable and non-cognizable offence was made by the

accused, he is competent to investigate even the non-cognizable

offence without permission of the learned Magistrate along with

the cognizable offence. On completion of investigation police

submitted charge sheet under Sections 341/323/354 of the

Indian Penal Code.

Under such circumstances, this Court cannot at this stage

hold that the charge sheet is bad. It is for the trial Court to

consider at the time of consideration of charge as to whether

penal provision of Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code will

attract against the petitioner or not. At this stage, I do not find

any material to admit the instant revision for quashing the

criminal proceeding pending in the trial Court.

Accordingly, the instant revision is summarily dismissed.

It is made clear that the observation made hereinabove is

confined only for the purpose of disposal of the instant revision

and the learned Magistrate shall consider all such points as may

be taken by the accused without being prejudiced or swayed

over in any manner on the observation made in the instant

order.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)