The court reiterated that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be exercised sparingly, carefully, and with great caution, and only in the rarest of rare cases.

DIPAK SAHA RAY, J.

1. THE present case arises out of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for quashing the criminal proceeding of Kasba P.S. Case No. 175(5) of 2010 corresponding to B.G.R. No. 2674 of 2010 under Sections 323/506/354/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code which is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas.

2. THE relevant facts of the present case are, in a nutshell, as follows:

3. O.P. No. 2 herein as defacto complainant filed a petition of complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas which was sent to the O.C., Kasba P.S. for investigation after treating that compliant as FIR under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, Kasba P.S. case No. 179(5) of 2010 was started. In the said petition of complaint the defacto complainant alleged therein inter alia that the defacto complainant and her mother entered into an agreement with the accused person on 23.5.2005 for development and construction of a multistoried building after demolishing their dilapidated structure and at the time of execution of the said agreement, the defacto complainant and her mother delivered all the papers viz. Power of Attorney, original Deed of Conveyance of the property etc. But even after the lapse of 5-6 years the accused/developer did not develop the property. Accordingly, notice was issued upon the accused but he did not pay any heed to that notice. He also did not return the aforesaid documents which were handed over to him. Accordingly, the matter was informed to Kasba P.S. and G.D. was lodged vide Kasba P.S. G.D. Entry No. 567 dated 9.4.2010; but no action was taken by the Police. It is further alleged that the defacto complainant and her mother went to the house of the accused person on 4.5.2010 at 9 A.M. for getting back their said valuable papers and documents of their property. But the accused person refused to return the same and threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. The accused person and his henchman tried to outrage the modesty of the defacto complainant and drove them out from his house after assaulting them. The defacto complainant also informed the above matter to the Kasba P.S. vide Kasba P.S. G.D. Entry No. 432 dated 7.5.2010. As the Police of Kasba P.S. did not take any step inspite of getting the aforesaid information from the defacto complainant, she filed the instant petition of complaint before the learned court.

4. IT is the case of the petitioner that O.P. No. 2 that is, the defacto complainant filed a case with an ulterior motive to harass him. It is alleged that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature and accordingly, the petitioner/accused initiated a civil suit No. 1444 of 2008 against the defacto complainant and her mother which is still pending. It has been further alleged that the petition of complaint does not disclose necessary ingredient of any criminal offence. Even then by influencing the Police Personnel, the defacto complainant and her mother got the said case charge sheeted, though the Police failed to collect any prima facie materials in support of the allegations made by the defacto complainant. Accordingly, the instant application has been filed praying for quashing the proceedings of Kasba P.S. case No. 179(5) of 2010.

5. IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition of complaint does not contain the ingredient of alleged offences under Sections 323/354/420/506/120B IPC. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the Police during investigation failed to collect any incriminating materials against the petitioner/accused person even then charge sheet has been submitted in this case. It is also argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein that in order to harass and to create pressure upon him the defacto complainant filed the said criminal case though the allegations made