SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Cal) 146

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Biswanath Basu and Others – Petitioners
Versus
Suprabhat Kundu – Respondent
C.R.R. No. 409 of 2020
Decided On : 12-06-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Rajdeep Mazumder, Moyukh Mukherjee, Abhijit Singh.

Headnote:

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13 - Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Section 125 - Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 341/323/506/34 – Mental torture and cruelty - Quashing of Criminal proceedings – Cognizance of offence - Held, Inherent power given to the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very threshold - Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or harassment. When there are materials to indicate that a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala-fides and proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding –Criminal proceedings quashed - disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings in connection with Complaint Case No. AC-2887 of 2019 under Sections 341/323/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas and all orders passed in connection therewith including order dated 24.04.2019 whereby the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas was pleased to taken cognizance against the accused persons/petitioners herein under Section 341/323/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The petitioner’s case is that the marriage of the daughter of the Petitioners No. 1 and 2, namely, Lipika Basu was solemnized with the Opposite Party 01.02.2009 as per the Hindu Rites and Custom. Said Lipika Kundu and the Opposite Party have 2 (two) daughters, the elder daughter is 9 years old and the younger daughter is 5 years old. The Petitioner No. 1, Petitioner No. 2, Petitioner No. 3 herein are the father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of the Opposite party respectively.

3. It is alleged that Lipika Kundu, wife of the complainant soon after her marriage was subjected to immense torture and mental cruelty. The Opposite Party in an inebriated condition has committed such monstrous acts, and the incident reached its saturation point when the Opposite Party as well as the other in laws of said Lipika Kundu, threw the said lady out from her matrimonial home, and segregated her from her young children.

4. Being compelled, said Lipika Kundu preferred an application under 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and vide order dated 29.11.2019, maintenance was awarded by the Learned Court. As a retaliation, the Opposite Party/husband filed divorce proceedings.

5. The petitioners state that Suprobhat Kundu (herein after referred as the Opposite Party) filed a complaint case under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas on 24.04.2019 and which was subsequently registered as Complaint Case No. AC-2887 of 2019 under Sections 323/324/325/506/341/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is now pending before the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas.

6. The allegations as leveled in the said complaint, inter-alia, are to the effect that the Opposite Party is the husband of Lipika Kundu. On 10.04.2019 at about 9 a.m. the Opposite Party went to the address i.e. C/o - Dilip Bag, Vill - Vasa 14 No. beside Swami Narayan Mandir, South 24 Parganas, Pin-743503 and saw that his wife Lipika Kundu nee Basu taking breakfast along with the Petitioner No. 2 her father, Petitioner No. 3 her mother, Petitioner No. 4 her brother and also with the other 2 accused persons namely Joydeep Das and his mother. It is alleged that after seeing this, the Opposite Party was shocked and astonished and told the Petitioner No. 1 that why his wife had finished his life. Then, all the petitioners herein along with the other 2 accused persons become angry and attacked the Opposite Party with fist and blow. It was also alleged that the another accused person namely Joydeep Das jumped on the Opposite Party and assaulted him with fist and blow on his face. When the Opposite Party tried to flee away from place of incident, he was brutally assaulted by the petitioner No. 4 namely Dipankar Basu and for that the Opposite Party suffered several injuries on his body and face.

7. It is stated that the Opposite party has filed a suit for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, registered as Mat Suit No. 3405 of 2018 before the District Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas which is now pending before the Court of the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 6th Court at Alipore.

8. The Petitioners state that the impugned proceedings is a product of suppression of material facts, which has bee

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top