JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the charge sheet proceedings in Baranagar Police Station case No.472 of 2017 corresponding case number being GR 4149 of 2017 under Sections 498A/406/506/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas.

2. The petitioner's case is that the opposite party no.3 i.e. the proforma opposite party is a cousin brother of the petitioner residing at 54A, Gurupada Halder Road, Police Station-Kalighat, Kolkata-700 026.

3. The opposite party no.2 and opposite party no.3 got married to each other on 20.01.2016 and the petitioner had taken several responsibilities pertaining to the said marriage.

4. After the said marriage was solemnized, the opposite party no. 2 and proforma opposite party no. 3 started to reside as husband and wife at 54/A, Gurupada Halder Road, Kolkata-700 026, District-24 Parganas.

5. During this period the petitioner was residing at 1094, Kalikapur Main Road, Post Office-Mukundapur, Kolkata-700 099 and thus had no connection with the opposite party no.2 and 3 in any way.

6. Sometime in the month of September, 2016 the opposite party no.3 informed the petitioner that there has been some misunderstanding between him and the opposite party no.2 and subsequently the opposite party no.2 has left her matrimonial home.

7. The petitioner presuming such dispute by and between the opposite party no. 2 and 3 as a normal misunderstanding agreed to mediate and thus talked to the parents of the opposite party no.2 with the intention to resolve the dispute between the opposite parties as any person of ordinary prudence would have done.

8. On such intervention by the petitioner, the opposite party no. 2 returned to her matrimonial home at 54/A, Gurupada Halder Road, Police Station-Kalighat, Kolkata-700 026. Thereafter, again the opposite party nos. 2 and 3 started to lead their conjugal life at 54/A, Gurupada Halder Road, Police Station-Kalighat, Kolkata-700 026. The petitioner was neither involved, nor aware about the conjugal relation between the opposite party no.2 and the proforma opposite party no.3.

9. On July 2017 the petitioner received a notice under 41(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and came to know that the opposite party no.2 had filed a complaint and subsequently a F.I.R has been registered against the petitioner along with the opposite party no.3 being the husband of the opposite party no.2 and such FIR was registered under Sections 498A/406/506/323/34 of the India Penal Code. It is stated that the opposite party no.2 has lodged such F.I.R with malafide intention to harass the petitioner.

10. The petitioner complied with the notice under Section 41(A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and met the investigating authorities.

11. Ms. Debipriya Mitra, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the opposite party no.2 has also preferred a false and frivolous proceeding under the provisions Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

12. It is submitted that the FIR lodged by the opposite part no.2 is a result of personal vendetta. The investigating authorities have submitted the impugned charge sheet without conducting any investigation.

13. That the charge sheet has been submitted by the investigating officer in connivance with the opposite party no.2.

14. And for that this instant proceeding is liable to be quashed.

15. In spite of due service there is no representation on behalf of the opposite party no.2.

16. The opposite party no.1/State is represented through Ms. Purnima Ghosh.

17. Ms. Manasi Roy has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no. 3.

18. Certified copy of the case diary is placed by the learned counsel for the State.

19. From the records, it appears that the petitioner has complied with the notice under Section 41A of IPC.

20. In Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar and Anr., Criminal Appeal No. 1277 of 2014, on 2 July, 2014, the Supreme Court lai