Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dharma Das Bose & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 25 January, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Present: - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhendu Samanta.
C.R.R. No. -1887 of 2018
IN THE MATTER OF
Dharma Das Bose & Anr.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
For the petitioner : Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Adv.,
Ms. Dhanasree Biswas, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, P.P.,
Mr. Saryati Datta, Adv.
Judgment on : 25.01.2023
Subhendu Samanta, J.
This is an application u/s 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure for quashing a charge sheet being Bishnupur Police
Station charge sheet No. 84 of 2013 dated 10th August, 2013 for commission
of offence punishable u/s 498A/304B/34 IPC arising out of Bishnupur
Police Station Case No. 19 of 2012 pending before the Learned Additional
Chief Juditial Magistrate Bishnupur, Bankura being GR Case No. 154 of
2012.
The brief fact of the case is that the present OP No. 2 lodged a written
complaint on 22 February, 2012 to the IC Bishnupur Police Station
containing inter alia regarding the Dowry Death of his sister-in-law. The
marriage between Sister-in-law of respondent No. 2 and one Niladri Bose
was solemnised on 27th July 2007. It was alleged that at the time of
marriage sufficient amount of dowry was given as per demand but
immediately after the marriage the husband and in-laws inflicted torture
upon the victim both physically and mentally on the demand of further
dowry of Rs.-50,000/- When their demand was not fulfilled she was driven
out from her matrimonial home. On 21.02.2012 at about 17.00 hours when
no one was there at her parental house, she committed suicide by setting
herself on fire. On the basis of that written complaint Bishnupur Police
Station Case No. 19 of 2012 dated 22 February, 2012 was started u/s
498A/304B/34 IPC against the husband and in-laws. The investigation of
the police ended in charge-sheet. Hence this revision for quashing the
charge sheet.
Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the
present petitioners are the brothers of the husband of the victim. They
further submitted before this court that the petitioners never demanded any
money from the parents of the victim nor they inflicted or instigated any
kind of torture upon the victim at any point of time. It is positive case of the
petitioners that due to job purpose, they could not able to visit their native
place more than once in a year but still the investigating officer implicated
themselves as accused in connection with the instant case. They further
submits that the present petitioner are totally innocent and they were never
involved in day to day alleged torture whether physically or mentally upon
the victim. It is the argument of the Learned Advocate appearing for the
petitioner that the investigating officer without conduct a proper
investigation submitted charge sheet and wherein the present petitioners
were arrayed as an accused being only the in-laws of the victim. It is the
case of the petitioner that the matrimonial house of the victim was at
Bishnupur, Bankura but the present petitioner were residing at New Delhi
and Calcutta respectively in a separate mess. They have no connection
regarding day to day family affairs of the victim and her husband. So, the
petitioners prayed for quashing the charge sheet against them.
Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the State submits that the
death of the victim was caused within the 07 years from the date of
marriage. Accordingly, the ingredients u/s 498A/304B is very much well
established. He again argued, during the course of investigation police has
collected several materials regarding involvement of the in-laws of the victim
in the alleged commission of offence. He further submitted before this court
that the statement of available witness disclosed the involvement of the each
and every accused including the present petitioner. The police has also
collected the medical papers and post mortem report of the victim. At this
juncture the evidence so collected by the I.O. during the course of
investigation cannot be brushed aside. So he prayed for rejection of the
instant criminal revision.
Heard, the Learned Advocate perused the materials on record. This is
an application for quashing the criminal proceeding including the charge
sheet of a criminal case initiated u/s 498A/304B of IPC. The present
petitioners are the brothers of the husband of the victim. On perusing the
CD it appears that the police has collected materials regarding the
involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence. The available
witnesses stated the name of the present petitioners to be involved in the
alleged offence. Thus, there are prima facie materials against the present
petitioners.
According to the provisions 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code this
court has its inherent power to quash a criminal proceeding if it is appears
to be malicious or out of grudge. The grounds for quashing a criminal
proceeding has discussed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments
including State of Hariyana Vs. Bhajanlal. The parameters for quashing a
criminal proceeding was well discussed in para- 108 of Bhajanlal's case. It
has to be proved that the proceeding of a criminal case before the trial court
is abuse of process of court. In this case there is nothing in the record to
disbelieve the materials and evidences collected by the I.O. during the
course of investigation. It may be the facts that the present petitioners were
permanent resident of elsewhere than the matrimonial house of the victim;
but admittedly the present petitioners are the in- laws of the victim.
Considering the statement of available witnesses it appears that the prima
facie involvement of the present petitioners are very well established.
Considering the same I find no justification to invoke the inherent power of
this court to quash the criminal proceeding.
Hence the instant criminal revision appears to be devoid of merit and
liable to be dismissed. In result thereof CRR is dismissed.
Pending connected CRAN applications if any, is also disposed.
Any order of stay passed by this Court during the continuation of the
CRR is 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.)
