SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
Dr. Saibal Adhikari and Ors. – Petitioners
versus
State of West Bengal and Anr. – Respondents
CRR 460 of 2023
Decided on 10.9.2026

Important Points

IMPORTANT POINT
Cruelty and criminal breach of trust – Criminal case can be quashed where allegations are general in nature.

Act Referred

INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.498(a), S.406, S.34

Headnote

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498A/406/34 – Cruelty and criminal breach of trust – Common intention – Quashing petition – Materials in Case Diary in show that allegations are general in nature – As such, permitting case to proceed against petitioners, will clearly be abuse of process of law, considering that none of ingredients required to constitute offences alleged are present against petitioners – Criminal proceeding quashed against petitioners. (Paras 8, 9 and 10)

Result: Revision Application allowed.

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Barun Kr. Das, Mr. Aritra Bhattacharyya, Ms. Priparna Sardar, and Mr. Rahul Ganguly, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Sagar Saha, and Ms. Nayana Mukhopadhyay, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.—The revisional application has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceeding in GR. Case No.5396 of 2021, pending before the Court of the learned 1st Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, which arose out of Belghoria Police Station Case no. 419 of 2021 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The petitioner’s case in short is that the petitionerno.1 is the father in law, the petitioner no.2 is the mother in law, the petitioner no.3 is a typist in the Pathology Laboratory owned by the petitioner no.1 while the petitioner no.4 is the driver of the petitioner no.1.

3. The de facto complainant in the present case in her written complaint has alleged that from the 2nd day of her marriage, the accused persons have inflicted mental and physical cruelty upon her by demanding dowry. It is further stated that the husband of the de facto complainant (since deceased) was a drug addict and a regular drunkard and used to inflict mental and physical torture upon the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant has further alleged that the petitioner no.1 and 2 are the father in law and mother in law of the de facto complainant but they took no action against their son. Admittedly, the petitioner no.3 and 4 are not relatives of the husband of the de facto complainant and as such the provision of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is not applicable to them.

4. The de facto complainant has further stated that her late husband used to force her to consume alcohol and used to inflict physical torture upon her causing bodily injuries and would also insult the de facto complainant.

5. State has placed the case diary. On perusal of the materials on record, it appears that the principal allegations are against the husband of the de facto complainant, who is now deceased.

6. Section 498A of IPC, lays down:—

“498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.— For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means—

(a) any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or

(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

Ingredients of offence. -The essential ingredients of the offence under sec. 498A are as follows:-

(1) A woman was married;

(2) She was subjected to cruelty;

(3) Such cruelty consisted in -

(i) any lawful conduct as was likely to drive such woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health whether mental or physical;

(ii) harm to such woman with a view to coercing her to meet unlawful demand for property or valuable security or on account of failure of such woman or any of her relations to meet the lawful demand;

(iii) the woman was subjected to such cruelty by her husband or any relation of her husband.”

7. In Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Others v. State of Telangana & Another, in Criminal Appeal No. ………… of 2024 (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 16239 of 2024, decided on December 10, 2024, the Supreme Court held:—

“15. An offence is punishable under Section 498A of the IPC when a husband or his relative subjects a woman to cruelty, which may result in imprisonment for a term extending up to three years and a fine. The Explanation under Section 498A of the IPC defines “cruelty” for the purpose of Section 498A of the IPC to mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a) or (b). The first limb of clause (a) of the Explanation of Section 498A of t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top