Shri Tushar Nandi vs The State Of Tripura
2022 Latest Caselaw 1085 Tri

                                Page 1 of 6



                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                         _A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A_
                         CRL REV P No.38 of 2021
Shri Tushar Nandi, son of late Monoranjan Nandi of Kanchan Nagar, P.S.
Santirbazar, District- South Tripura.
                                                  ......Petitioner(s)
                                VERSUS
The State of Tripura
                                                           ......Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s) : Ms. Monalisha Pal, Advocate, vice Mr. Subrata Sarkar, Sr. Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Debnath, Addl. P.P.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) Date of hearing and Judgment : 16th December, 2022.

JUDGMENT & ORDER(ORAL)

Heard Ms. Monalisha Pal, learned counsel appearing on behalf

of Mr. Subrata Sarkar learned senior counsel for the petitioner and also

heard Mr. S. Debnath, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for

the State-respondent.

[2] The instant appeal has been filed by the petitioner to challenge

the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South

Tripura, Belonia dated 27.07.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019 and

the judgment and order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate

dated 11.03.2019 in PRC(WP) No.09 of 2016 whereby the learned Sessions

Judge upholding the judgment passed by the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner.

[3] The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 02.08.2015 the

complainant Smt. Bandhana Datta (Nandi) lodged a complaint before the

Santirbazar police station inter alia alleging that she got married with the

petitioner about 6 years ago after observing all rituals and formalities as

per the Hindu marriage, Act. Inside one year after marriage, she gave

birth to a male child. Thereafter, the present petitioner pressurized her to

bring more money from her parents on demand of dowry although during

her marriage, several house-hold articles, ornaments and cash worth

Rs.33000/- were given to the petitioner. The petitioner used to beat her up

severely both physically and mentally and on 02.08.2015 it was alleged

that at about 9 am when the informant was working, the petitioner beaten

her up severely with wooden bar. As a result of which, the informant

sustained grievous bleeding injuries and was under treatment at

Santirbazar Hospital. After completion of trial, the learned trial court on

11.03.2019 convicted the petitioner to suffer S.I. for 01(one) year and

also to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to suffer S.I. for three months for

commission of offence u/s. 498A of IPC. Consequently, against the above

judgment, an appeal was preferred in the appellate court. The appellate

court passed an order of conviction and sentence dated 27.07.2021 in

connection with criminal appeal No.07 of 2019 convicting the petitioner

to suffer S.I. for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- in default to suffer

S.I. for three months for commission of offence punishable u/s. 498A of

IPC. Hence, this revision petition.

[4] The petitioner initially filed a petition No.PRC(WP) 09 of

2016 dated 11.03.2019 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

South Tripura, Belonia for acquittal. The learned Judge, after taking into

considerations all the evidence and the arguments made by both sides,

convicted the petitioner under Section 498A of IPC to suffer simple

imprisonment for a term of one year and also ordered him to pay a fine of

Rs.5,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of 3

more months. The operative portion of the judgment is reproduced

hereunder :

"9. At this stage, I have also considered the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act. In the Instant Case, as found to have been proved, the convict tortured the victim mercilessly to an unprecedented extent. After physical assault, the victim underwent treatment at the hospital and after being released, she returned back to her marital house with a further hope to continue her conjugal life. Such a dreadful act the convict could commit that he kept the victim under starvation until she was bound to lay her hands before the neighbours for her livelihood and ultimately returned back to her father's house. It was most unfortunate that the informant never retaliated which gave the accused more scope and belief that he would not be questioned by anybody for his misdeeds. The legal framework should be implemented in our society in such a manner that the miscreants like the present convict receives a concrete message. Hence, I opinion strictly that the convict is barred from getting benefit of the instant provisions of Probation of Offenders Act and his punishment is deemed to be necessary.

10. I have also the convict on question of sentence to be awarded for the offence committed. It is pleaded by the convict that he is the sole bread-earner of his family and to look after his old-aged mother. A long period of sentence would therefore, lead

to unusual life of his mother, as such, he prays for mercy of this Court.

11. I have taken into consideration all the evidences recorded so far and the arguments placed by both the sides. Considering this Case in its entirety, I hereby sentence the convict Tushar Nandi U/S-498A of the Indian Penal Code to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a term of 01(one) year and also Order him to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) and in default, to suffer Simple Imprisonment for a term of 03(three) more months. Any period of custody, undergone by the convict during investigation and trial shall stand set-off

[5] Subsequently, the petitioner moved the Sessions court by

filing Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019 dated 27.07.2021 before the

learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia challenging the order

passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The learned Sessions

Judge, upholding the judgment passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate

dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. The operative portion of the

judgment reads as follows :

"So, in the totality of the evidence of the witnesses, I find no impropriety in the judgment of learned trial Court justifying any interference from this Court. I find no merit in the appeal. Thus, the appeal is dismissed. The convict-appellant is hereby directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within one month from today to undergo the sentence."

[6] Being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the learned

courts below, the petitioner filed this instant petition seeking the

following relief :

"(i) Admit the revision petition;

(ii) Call for the case records from the lower court;

(iii) Stay the execution of sentences and realization of fine and to release the revision petitioners on bail till disposal of the present revision petition.

(iv) After hearing the Lordship would be kind enough to set aside/quashed the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentences dated 27/07/2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in Case No. Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019."

[7] Ms. Monalisha Pal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of

Mr. S. Sarkar, learned senior counsel for the petitioner contended that the

contents of the complaint do not construe to attract 498A of IPC and

accordingly reliance has been placed on the depositions of P.W.1 and

others. She further submits that the judgment of conviction and sentence

passed by the learned courts below does not suffer from illegality and

impropriety for the reason that the learned courts below failed to

appreciate the facts of the case and examination under Section 313 of

Cr.P.C was not made in accordance with law. She further contends that

the burden of proof lies upon the prosecution but the facts brought into in

the cross-examination were not considered by the courts below and prays

for setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated

27.07.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia

in Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019.

[8] On the other hand, Mr. S. Debnath, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition contending that the learned

courts below correctly held the accused liable to be guilty of the offence

committed by him under Section 498-A of IPC. He further submits that the

judgment passed by the learned courts below does not suffer from

illegality, impropriety and irregularity as the learned courts below has

correctly appreciated the facts of the case which calls for no interference.

Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the present petition.

[9] After hearing learned counsel appearing for the respective

parties, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the consistent statements

made in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the benefit of doubt

needs to be extended to the accused person since the allegations are not

proved beyond reasonable doubt.

[10] Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the impugned

judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia

dated 27.07.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2019 is set aside.

Consequently, the order of conviction and sentence dated 11.03.2019

passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia in

case No. PRC(WP) 09 of 2016 is also quashed. Send down the LCRs

forthwith.

[11] Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

Dipesh