Shampa Sen Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 3154 Jhar

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     Criminal Revision No. 319 of 2016

Shampa Sen Gupta                                                           .... . Petitioner
                                 Versus
The State of Jharkhand and others                                   ... Opposite Parties

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

For the Petitioner          : None
For the State               : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, APP
For OP Nos.2 to 5           : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate
                                      -------

Order No. 12 /Dated: 12th August 2022

Mr. Sunil Singh, the learned counsel for OP Nos. 2 to 5 has raised a preliminary objection on maintainability of the present revision petition.

2. Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, the learned APP represents the State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.

4. Inspite of notice issued to the petitioner on administrative side vide order dated 18th April 2022, the learned counsel for the petitioner has chosen not to appear in this case.

5. On the previous occasions, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel appeared for the petitioner on 11th March 2022 and 18th April 2022.

6. On 11th March 2022 , the following order was passed by this Court:

"Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, the learned APP appears for the State.

2. Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel appears for O.P Nos. 2 to 5.

3. An e-mail has been received from Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking adjournment for filing a substitution petition.

4. On 6th November 2017, notices were issued to O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 and lower Court records were called for from the Court concerned. Thereafter, it came on Board on 6th April 2021 under the heading "For Admission".

5. On that day, the following order was passed by this Court:

"Mr. Hadish Ansari, the learned counsel for the petitionr states that after the judgment of acquittal by the appellate Court the opposite party nos.2 to 5 have not even cared to take back the petitioner to her matrimonial home.

Mr. Sunil Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos.2 to 5 seeks adjournment for taking fresh instructions in the matter.

Post this matter on 30.04.2021 to be listed in the supplementary casue list under the heading "Final Disposal".

6. On 17th February 2022, except the learned APP, no one appeared for the parties and therefore the Court was constrained to pass the following order:

"This criminal revision petition was called out in the morning,

however, no one appeared for the petitioner. After the recess also, no one appears for the petitioner. The learned counsel for O.P Nos.2 to 5 is also absent. Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, the learned APP appears for the State. Registry to issue notice to the learned counsels appearing for the parties who have filed their Vakalatnama in the present criminal revision petition.

Post this matter on 11th March 2022 under the heading for "Orders".

7. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 17th February 2022 there was some connectivity issues at his end and therefore he could not appear - though, the order dated 17th February 2022 records that the matter was called out several times pre and post lunch sessions.

8. The petitioner is the wife who filed a case under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code against her husband and in-laws.

9. According to Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel, the petitioner has passed away.

10. On a pointed query from the Court, now since the complainant- wife has died who can substitute her in the present proceeding, the learned counsel for the petitioner expresses his helplessness to assist the Court.

11. Post this matter on 8th April 2022."

7. On 18th April 2022, the following order was passed by this Court:

"Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that Mr. Devdut Gupta who is doing pairvi in this criminal revision petition collected the case records from his chamber with no objection.

2. On 11th March 2022, the following order was passed by this Court:

"Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, the learned APP appears for the State.

2. Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel appears for O.P Nos. 2 to 5.

3. An e-mail has been received from Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeking adjournment for filing a substitution petition.

4. On 6th November 2017, notices were issued to O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 and lower Court records were called for from the Court concerned. Thereafter, it came on Board on 6th April 2021 under the heading "For Admission".

5. On that day, the following order was passed by this Court: "Mr. Hadish Ansari, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that after the judgment of acquittal by the appellate Court the opposite party nos.2 to 5 have not even cared to take back the petitioner to her matrimonial home. Mr. Sunil Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos.2 to 5 seeks adjournment for taking fresh instructions in the matter. Post this matter on 30.04.2021 to be listed in the supplementary cause list under the heading "Final Disposal".

6. On 17th February 2022, except the learned APP, no one appeared for the parties and therefore the Court was constrained to pass the following order:

"This criminal revision petition was called out in the 2 Cr. Rev. No. 319 of 2016 morning, however, no one appeared for the petitioner. After the recess also, no one appears for the petitioner. The learned counsel for O.P Nos.2 to 5 is also absent. Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, the learned APP appears for the State. Registry to issue notice to the learned counsels appearing for the parties who have filed their Vakalatnama in the present criminal revision petition. Post this matter on 11 th March 2022 under the heading for "Orders".

7. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 17th February 2022 there was some connectivity issues at his end and therefore he could not appear - though, the order dated 17th February 2022 records that the matter was called out several times pre and post lunch sessions.

8. The petitioner is the wife who filed a case under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code against her husband and in-laws.

9. According to Mr. Ranjit Kumar, the learned counsel, the petitioner has passed away.

10. On a pointed query from the Court, now since the complainant-wife has died who can substitute her in the present proceeding, the learned counsel for the petitioner expresses his helplessness to assist the Court.

11. Post this matter on 8th April 2022."

3. Registry to issue notice to the petitioner at his address mentioned in the memo of party.

4. Post this matter on 24th June 2022."

8. Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwary, the learned APP tenders photo copy of a hand written report dated 11th August 2022 of Samuel Bhengra, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Sonardih O.P, District-Dhanbad.

9. Taken on record.

10. According to this report, the petitioner has not been found at the place of residence disclosed in the memo of the present revision petition.

11. In the above circumstance, reserving a right with the petitioner to engage a counsel of her choice, Mr. Abhijeet Tushar, the learned counsel is appointed as Amicus to argue this criminal revision petition on behalf of the petitioner.

12. Registry shall provide a complete set of paper book along with all the necessary documents to the learned Amicus.

13. Let name of Mr. Abhijeet Tushar, the learned Amicus appear in the cause list.

14. The learned Amicus shall be paid Rs.5,500/- for each date of hearing. The fee for the learned Amicus shall be paid by the Department of Home, Government of Jharkhand.

15. Post the matter on 16th September 2022.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) sudhir