Sonoyar Mallick & Ors vs State Of West Bengal & Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 4129 Cal

                                    1


              IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Present: -      Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhendu Samanta.
                      C.R.R. No. - 2233 of 2018
                      Sonoyar Mallick & Ors.
                              Vs.
                   State of West Bengal & Anr.

For the Petitioners          : Mr. Tapan Datta Gupta, Adv.,
                               Mr. Parvej Anam, Adv.


For the State                  : Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld.P.P.,
                                 Mr. Imran Ali, Adv.
                                 Mrs. Debjani Sahu, Adv.

For the de facto complainant: Mrs. M. Roy, Adv.




Judgment on                    :        05.07.2023



Subhendu Samanta, J.

This is an application u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure for quashing of a proceeding being GR No. 513 of

2016 arising out of Khanakul Police Station P.S Case No. 99 of

2006 dated 25.11.2006 u/s 498A/306/34 of IPC.

The brief fact of the case is that on the basis of a written

complaint of OP 2 on 25.11.2006, a police case was registered

by Khanakul Police Station vide Khanakul Police Station Case

No. Case No. 99 of 2006 dated 25.11.2006 u/s 498A/306/34

of IPC. The petition of complaint contends inter alia that the

complainant's daughter Jahanara Begam aged about 35 years

was married with petitioner No. 2 before 9 years ago according

to Muslim Rites and Custom. After some years of marriage the

complainant's said daughter was being tortured by the

petitioners both mentally and physically over the issue of their

family matter; on 13.10.2006 night at about 02 hours

Jahanara Begam set fire on her person due to torture by the

petitioners. She was admitted at Uluberia SD Hospital and

from their shifted to nursing home at Jaypur. On 29.10.2006

she was brought back at her husband's house, proper care was

not taken. On 25.11.2006 at about 14 hours she was expired.

The present petitioner No. 1 is the father- in-law of petitioner

No. 2 is the husband and petitioner No. 3 is the mother-in-law

of the deceased.

During the continuation of the instant revision petitioner

No. 3 died thus the instant revision is abated against her.

The investigation of the police was ended in charge sheet

against the all accused persons u/s 498A/306/34 IPC.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted before this

court that the FIR as well as the charge framed against the

petitioner is false and concocted. The investigating agency

without properly investigating the matter filed the charge sheet.

The marriage between the parties was held about 09 years ago.

The deceased caught fire on 13.10.2006 and succumbed to his

injury on 25.11.2006. During the prolonged treatment no

statement of the deceased or no dying declaration was recorded

by the police. There are no ingredients of offence punishable

u/s 306 IPC in this case. From the each corner of the FIR as

well as the charge sheet, it will not appear that at any point of

time the deceased instigated by the present petitioner to

commit suicide. The sole ingredients of Section 306 IPC is

missing here; more over the deceased, the married lady never

uttered a single word of her alleged ill treatment or tortured at

her matrimonial home. Thus the allegation of abatement of

suicide in the FIR as well as the charge framed against the

accused persons u/s 498A/306 IPC is baseless and the

proceeding is liable to be quashed.

Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the state

submitted before this court that there are several materials in

the CD against the present petitioners regarding their

involvement in the alleged offence. During the course of

investigation the statements available witnesses were collected

who stated against the accused persons regarding their

involvement in the alleged offence.

Learned Advocate on behalf of the state also argued that

there are other prima facie evidences in the CD which cannot

be ascertained at the stage. So he prayed for rejection of the

revisional application.

The de-facto complainant submitted that the charge

sheet was submitted against all the accused persons and the

case is posted for trial. At this juncture the quashing is not

permissible.

Heard the Learned Advocate perused the materials on

record on perusal of the CD it appears that the I.O. has

collected several materials accusing all the petitioners to be

responsible for the alleged offence. The prima facie ingredients

are there in the CD.

In this case the charge has been framed u/s 306 IPC

along with Section 498A IPC. It was alleged in the FIR that the

married lady was committed suicide under the influence of

torture inflicted upon at her matrimonial home. Whether there

are any instigation to commit suicide, cannot be ascertained at

the stage. I make it clear that this revisional court cannot go

into the merit of the evidences collected by the investigating

agency. During the course or investigation the prima facie

materials in this case are so glaring that can only be explained

properly during the trial. LCR reflected trial has already

commenced, thus, it is not proper stage to entertain the

petitioners.

Accordingly, I find no materials to entertain the instant

criminal revision and it is liable to be dismissed as meritless.

CRR is dismissed.

The connected CRAN applications are also disposed of.

The instant GR case is pending since long. Thus the trial

court is directed to dispose of the matter as early as possible

more preferably within 06 months from the date of

communication of this order.

Returned the CD.

Any order of stay passed during the continuation of the

instant criminal revision is hereby 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.)