Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Asiya Bibi @ Asia Bibi & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 10 September, 2024
67
10.9.2024
sb
CRR 2543 of 2022
Asiya Bibi @ Asia Bibi & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. U.A. Dewan
Mr. Asif Dewan ...for the Petitioners
Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld. APP
Mr. Dipankar Paramanick ...for the State
This is an application wherein the petitioners have prayed for
quashing of the impugned proceeding being GR case no. 2025 of
2021 arising out of Samserganj Police Station case no. 324 of
2021 dated 11.10.2021.
The petitioner contended that the petitioner no. 1 is the
mother-in-law of the complainant and the petitioner no. 2 is the
brother-in-law of the complainant. The petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are
married sister-in-law who are residing with the family members at
their in laws house respectively.
It is submitted by the petitioners that the complainant lodged
a written complaint alleging that 11 years back, marriage was
solemnized between the complainant Naseba Khatun and Imtiaj
Hossain and due to said wedlock, two female child were born. It is
further alleged that the husband of the complainant along with
his family members demanded Rs. 1,30,000/- from the parents of
the complainant but as the parents of the complainant are very
poor, they managed to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the husband of the
complainant. It is further alleged that the accused persons did not
provide proper food to the complainant and sometimes she was
kept confined in a room. The husband of the complainant
threatened the complainant to kill her if the demand of Rs.
1,30,000/- is not paid. On 11.10.2021 at about 7 A.M. in
presence of the mother of the complainant, all the accused
persons assaulted the complainant.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that before
registering the instant case on 7.10.2021 at about 5 A.M. the
father-in-law of the complainant namely, Alauddin Biswas died
and before his demise his property was gifted in favour of his wife,
Asiya Bibi who is petitioner no. 1 in the instant application. After
receiving such information on 10.10.2021 the complainant
namely Nashiba Bibi became furious and assaulted Asiya Bibi
when the husband of the complainant and her brother in law
went to the local market to purchase funeral articles. Local people
rescued Asiya Bibi from the clutch of Nashiba Bibi who openly
threatened her to implicate the family members of Asiya Bibi by
lodging false complaints. It is evident that thereafter Nashiba Bibi
left the house of her husband and she lodged complaint before the
Executive Magistrate under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure who took cognizance.
After completion of investigation, in the instant case police
submitted charge-sheet under Sections 498A/324/34 of the
Indian Penal Code read with section 3 & 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act. The main grievance ventilated by the petitioners
is that without making proper enquiry, charge sheet has been
submitted against the petitioners. The police did not take notice
about fact that the complainant and his husband and the
children residing separately in a separate mess from the
petitioners house and the petitioners are totally innocent. Relying
upon the judgment reported in Vineet Kumar and Others Vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and Another reported in (2017) 13 SCC
369, he contended that in paragraph 102 of the Bhajanlal's case
it has been made clear that the criminal proceeding is liable to be
quashed if it is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where
the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him
due to private and personal grudge. Accordingly, the petitioners
have prayed for quashing of the proceeding.
Learned counsel for the State placed the case diary and has
drawn my attention at page no. 19 of the case diary which relates
to injury report and also the statement recorded by police under
Section 161 of the Code in page 6 to 11. He further contended
that the written complaint as well as materials available in the
case diary discloses cognizable offences and the investigation has
also been culminated into a charge sheet and for which it would
not be proper to quash the present proceedings at its threshold.
I have considered the submissions made by both the parties
and perused the contents of the written complaint as well as the
materials available in the case diary, where from it appears that
the materials in the case diary discloses allegation of committing
cognizable offence by the petitioners which involves fair question
of trial. While deciding an application of quashing the proceeding
court is not supposed to evaluate the truthfulness or otherwise
levelled by the complainant and his witnesses against the
petitioner. The allegation of the petitioner that the complaint
might have been initiated out of malice is not in itself ground for
quashing the criminal proceeding, if the materials available in
record otherwise justify continuance of the proceeding. Allegations
of malice or malafides may be relevant while examining the
evidence during trial but the mere fact that the complainant is
guilty of malafides would not be a ground for quashing the
prosecution. In the present case specific averments of allegation
against petitioner have been made in complaint and the
statements.
In a catena of decisions, it has been held that exercise of
power under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding
arises only when the allegations made in the FIR or the materials
collected during investigation do not constitute the ingredients of
the offences alleged. In fact interference by the High Court under
section 482 Cr.P.C. is to prevent the abuse of process of any court
or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, but if a prima facie case
is made out disclosing ingredients of the offence alleged against
the accused, the High Court is not expected to quash a criminal
proceeding.
In view of aforesaid discussion, I find that it is not a fit case
for quashing the impugned proceeding.
CRR 2543 of 2022 is accordingly dismissed.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be
given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
