Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sk. Rajab Ali vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 1 December, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Present: - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhendu Samanta.
C.R.R. No. - 3357 of 2018
With
IA No. CRAN 1 of 2019 (Old No. CRAN 854 of 2019)
+
CRAN 2 of 2019 ( Old No. CRAN 2639 of 2019)
IN THE MATTER OF
Sk. Rajab Ali.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Subhasish Pachhal Adv.
For the OP 2 to 8 : Mr. Ramashis Mukherjee Adv.,
Mr. Rameswar Sinha Adv.,
For the State : Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld. P.P.,
Mr. Imran Ali, Adv.,
Ms. Debjani Sahu Adv.
Judgment on : 01.12.2023
Subhendu Samanta, J.
This is an application u/s 401 read with Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure against an order dated 5th of
September 2018, passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate 6th
court Howrah in GR Case No. 6974 of 2012 arising out of
Domjur Police Station Case No. 775 of 2012 dated 10.10.2012
u/s 498A/406/506 of IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry
Prohibition Act.
The brief fact of the case is that the daughter of the
present petitioner namely one Rabia Begam got married with
the opposite party No. 2 as per Muslim Rites and Customs on
7th December 2010. It has been alleged that the Opposite Party
No. 2 i.e the husband and relatives of the husband inflicted
torture upon Rabia Begam at her matrimonial home for the
demand of dowry. After 06 months of marriage Rabia Begam
became pregnant and again it has been alleged that there was
a severe torture on demand of further dowry upon Rabia at her
matrimonial home. She could not bear the torture and left her
matrimonial home on 05.09.2012 and started residing with the
house of the petitioner. Rabia lodged a complaint against the
present private opposite Parties with the Domjur Police Station
on 10.10.2012 on the basis of which the instant GR Case
(Domjur PS Case No. 725 of 2012) was initiated during the
staying at her parents' house Rabia experienced severe pain at
her abdomen and she was admitted Kulal Rural Hospital on
26.10.2012. At the said hospital she was operated and
unfortunately during operation she succumbed though a
female baby could be removed alive from the womb. The
petitioner being the father reported the matter to Domjur Police
Station but the police did not take any step to investigate the
matter properly. The investigation of the case was proceeded
and in the mean time the petitioner filed an application praying
for adding Section 313 and Section 304 B of IPC in connection
with the said Domjur Police Station Case No. 775 of 2012.
Learned Judicial Magistrate Howrah upon hearing the
said application has rejected the same. Challenging the said
order the petitioner take out a revisional application before this
court being CRR No. 1960 of 2013. The same Criminal
revisional was disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench after
observing that the investigation is not completed as yet, it
would be open to the investigating agency to file charge sheet
under aforesaid the sections if the materials collected in course
of investigation was warrants.
Police submitted charge sheet in this case vide charge
sheet No. 659/14 dated 31.07.2014 u/s 498A/406/506 of IPC
read with section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
On perusing the said charge sheet the present petitioner
filed an application praying for further investigation. The
Learned Magistrate heard the petitioner and after perusing the
record rejected the said application by passing the impugned
order dated 05.09.2018.
Hence this revision.
Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the
impugned order passed by the Learned Magistrate is not
conformity with the entire facts and circumstances of this case.
The police has not conducted any investigation in respect of
the direction of this court vide CRR No. 1960 of 2013. During
the course of investigation the statement of the present
petitioner was not recorded moreover the police did not take
any steps to enquire the death of the victim Rabia Begam nor
collected any document regarding the physical condition of the
deceased which deteriorate due to the immense torture of the
private opposite parties.
He further argued that Learned Magistrate was totally
erred in law by deciding the petition for further investigation in
a mechanical manner. It was the entire case of the deceased
victim that she was mercilessly tortured by the private opposite
parties at her matrimonial home by which the physical
condition of the victim become critical. The investigation of the
police was very mechanical and the cause of death of the victim
was not properly elucidated. He further argued that the
Learned Magistrate has not gone into the merits of this case in
its entirety and mechanically rejected the petition for further
investigation. He argued that the death was actually caused
due to the serious physical condition of the victim which was
resulted to the heavy torture inflicted by the husband and in
laws of the victim. The police did not collect any evidence
regarding the physical condition of the victim and it is only
reason for which further investigation is required. Accordingly
the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
Learned Advocate for the State submits the case diary.
He submits that the investigation of the police was ended in
charge sheet. During the course of investigation police has
collected several materials which prima facie make out the
offence punishable u/s 498A/406/506 of IPC against the
private opposite parties. After the direction from the Hon'ble
High Court in CRR No. 1960of 2013. The Police have collected
the medical report and the death certificate of the victim which
was placed along with the CD.
He further argued that the Learned Magistrate has
perused the CD along with materials collected therein and is of
opinion that the further investigation is not required. The
cause of death of the victim has specifically mentioned by the
doctor in the medical certificate. The Learned Magistrate has
observed such medical certificate and opined to that fact. The
order of the Learned Magistrate is a speaking order arising
illegality. The prayer for further investigation of the petitioner
was correctly rejected by the Hon'ble Court.
Heard the Learned Advocate.
Perused the materials on record. I have perused the CD.
During the course of hearing of the instant criminal revision a
medical report is called for regarding the death of the victim
namely Rabia Begam. The report is placed before this court
perused the report. The report contains medical certificate and
cause of death of Rabia Begam including record -in-patient. It
appears from the record that the victim was admitted to the
said hospital on 26.10.2012 at 12:30 p.m. During the course of
treatment her condition became serious and it was informed to
the patient party that she was required to be referred to
another hospital. Instead of such opinion of the hospital
authority, the patient party wanted to treat the patient by
placing her at the said hospital. However the patient was
operated and she succumbed at 05:00 a.m. on 27.10.2012. The
cause of death was mentioned as acute cardio respiratory
failure due to Post Partum haemorrhage (pph). CD reflected
that during the course of investigation the police has collected
several materials including the statement of available witnesses
according to the direction of the court passed in for CRR 1960
of 2013.
The Learned Magistrate has perused the entire materials
in the CD; he has also opined that the cause of death which
was mentioned by the doctor has been specifically noted in the
CD.
Whether alleged unbearable torture inflicted by the
present private OP resulted to the serious physical condition of
the victim, can only be ascertained after prolonged the trial of
this case. I find no infirmity in the impugned order passed by
the Learned Magistrate.
Considering the same I find no merit to entertain the
criminal revision accordingly CRR is dismissed.
Connected CRAN applications if pending are also
disposed of.
Any order of stay passed by this court during the
pendency of the instant criminal revision is hereby also
vacated.
Parties to act upon the server copy and urgent certified
copy of the judgment be received from the concerned Dept. on
usual terms and conditions.
(Subhendu Samanta, J.)
