Mental cruelty inflicted upon a wife by her husband or his relatives, causing grave danger to her life and health, constitutes an offence under Section 498A IPC. The court's power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised sparingly and with circumspection, and the charge sheet and evidence therein form the basis for taking or refusing to take cognizance by the competent court.

JUDGMENT

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J. - The present revision has been preferred for quashing of the Charge Sheet and proceedings in G.R. No. 1934 of 2017, pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court at Sealdah under Section 498A/406/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, arising out of Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 197 of 2017, dated July 12, 2017 under Sections 498A/406/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and all orders passed therein.

2. The Petitioner's case is that he is the lawfully wedded husband of the Opposite Party No. 2 herein, their marriage having been duly solemnized on March 09, 2008, as per Hindu rites and customs.

3. Unfortunately, their married life was not peaceful due to the extremely hostile, adamant and inimical attitude of the Opposite Party No. 2 herein towards the present Petitioner and his family-members.

4. The Opposite Party No. 2 herein developed diverse kinds of medical conditions and disorders, which ushered in primary infertility with premature menopause, thereby rendering her unable to conceive and for this also she stated blaming the present Petitioner and even resumed self-medication at the advice of her own family-members, which further deteriorated her condition, for which she had to be hospitalized and treated at the Department of Neurology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro-Sciences, Bangalore.

5. Being unable to further endure the persistent mental torment and agony that was being perpetrated upon him at the behest of the Opposite Party No. 2 herein and finding no other alternative, the present Petitioner on June 19, 2017, through his Learned Advocate had duly served a Legal Notice upon the Opposite Party No. 2 herein requesting her to make all necessary arrangements so that appropriate proceedings for mutual divorce may be instituted between the parties.

6. In retaliation to the aforesaid Legal Notice, as served on his behalf upon the Opposite Party No. 2 herein, on July 12, 2017 the Opposite Party No. 2 herein lodged a Written Complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Beliaghata Police Station, falsely implicating the present Petitioner and all his family-members, which has led to the institution of the impugned criminal proceedings herein, being G.R. No. 1934 of 2017, arising out of Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 197 of 2017, dated July 12, 2017 under Sections 498A/406/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

7. In the instant Criminal Proceedings, the investigation has been concluded and Charge Sheet, being Beliaghata Police Station Charge Sheet No. 274/2017, dated December 06, 2017, has been submitted under Sections 498A/406/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Investigating Agency and cognizance taken.

8. Mr. Bibaswan Bhattacharrya, Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned trial Court erred in law and acted with material irregularity and indiscretion in allowing the impugned proceedings. That the very origin of the impugned proceedings herein is doubtful and suspicious in itself, inasmuch as the same was initiated almost a month (on 12.07.2017) after the Legal Notice dated June 19, 2017 was served on behalf of the present Petitioner upon the Opposite Party no. 2 herein for the initiation of appropriate proceedings for mutual divorce and that the instant impugned criminal proceedings has been deliberately and consciously initiated thereafter in a mala fide manner solely to neutralize and counteract the assertions made against her in the divorce petition and to harass and trouble the present Petitioner and his family-members as a retribution and reprisal.

9. The impugned proceedings herein is otherwise bad in law and based on perverse and unreasonable findings, and thus liable to be set aside and /or quashed.

10. The impugned proceedings, if allowed to continue, would amount to gross and flagrant miscarriage of justice an