IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Quashment proceeding – To exercise inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is not the rule but it is an exception which can be applied only if it appears to Court that miscarriage of justice would be committed if trial is allowed to proceed further.
(2) Voyeurism and stalking – Perpetrator’s gender, unwanted contact, repetition and absence of interest are essential elements of Section 354D of IPC.

JUDGMENT

Bibhas Ranjan De, J.—Prayer for quashment of proceedings in connection with A.C.G.R. No. 7195 of 2016 presently pending before the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore arising out of Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 715 of 2016 dated 24.12.2016 under Sections 354C/354D of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) has been sought in this instant revision application being no. CRR 1124 of 2018.

2. The prayer for speedy disposal of the proceeding in connection with that instant case which is pending before the Court of Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore has been made by the petitioner in connection with CRR 4188 of 2017.

3. Both this revision applications are taken up together for disposal via this common judgement.

Factual Backdrop:-

4. The opposite party no. 2 herein on 24.12.2016 lodged a written complaint to the Haridevpur Police Station which gave rise to Haridevpur PS Case No. 715 of 2016 alleging inter alia that whenever the complainant with her daughter used to go to school or market or for private tuition, it came to her notice that the petitioner used to watch and follow them which disturbed the opposite party no. 2. Since apart, the accused/petitioner captured her photographs/images of the opposite party no. 2 on his camera and mobile phone on different occasions which was duly reported to the police station from time to time. But, lastly on 22.12.2016 at about 3.30 p.m. the petitioner allegedly captured photographs/images secretly from his residence, while the complainant was standing on the road in front of her residential building. After noticing a flash when the opposite party no. 2 looked at the residence of the petitioner, then he fled inside the building. After apprehending that the accused/petitioner might have used photographs of the opposite party no. 2 for any wrongful purpose, the opposite party filed the complaint.

5. On receipt of such information Haridevpur P.S. started investigation and after completion of investigation filed charge sheet against the sole accused/petitioner under Section 354C/354D of the IPC. Thereafter, the petitioner surrendered and enlarged on bail.

6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned proceedings in connection with the case at hand, the petitioner has preferred this revision application.

7. Arguments Advanced:-

With respect to CRR 1124 of 2018:-

8. Ld. Counsel, Mr. Sourav Chattejee, appearing on behalf of the petitioner has mainly contended that the entire dispute by and between the parties at best relate to disputes which are purely civil in nature and no criminal proceeding should be allowed to proceed further in connection with the instant case.

9. Mr. Chatterjee has further argued that the facts and circumstances of the instant case make it amply clear that the opposite party no. 2 has instituted this proceeding in order to create pressure upon the developer to deliver the other car parking space in favour of her for which they do not have any right, title and interest.

10. Mr. Chatterjee has also pointed towards the behavior of opposite party no. 2 which clearly shows that she is hell bent to use the process of criminal law to harass the petitioner herein with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance.

11. Before parting with, Mr. Chatterjee has referred the impugned charge sheet wherein it was observed that during the course of investigation no evidence or witness could be found to substantiate the claim of the complainant. Through this observation Mr. Chatterjee has tried to make this Court understand that no case has been made out against the petitioners under Sections 354C/354D of the IPC.

12. In order to substantiate his claim, Mr. Chatterjee has relied on some cases which stand as follows:-

• Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 946

• Haji Iqbal alias Bala through S.P.O.A vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 948

• State of Har