Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Cal) 232

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Pralay Kumar Das & Others - Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Another - Respondent
CRR. No. 3721 of 2019
Decided On : 01-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioners:Debashis Banerjee, Rakesh Jana, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Arijit Ganguly, Advocate, R2, None.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to prevent the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code in matrimonial disputes and the court's power to quash proceedings if the person is innocent and falsely implicated, emphasizing the exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.

Headnote:
498A - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code - Section 498A/406/34 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the essential ingredients of the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and referred to relevant case laws to emphasize the need to prevent misuse of the provision. The court also highlighted the power of the High Court to quash proceedings if the person is innocent and falsely implicated, and the importance of exercising inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 got married in 1995 and had been living separately since 2010. The opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, leading to the initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners under Section 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner claimed that they had mutually decided to settle their disputes and had filed for mutual divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no prima facie case of cognizable offence against any of the accused/petitioners and that the proceedings should be quashed in the interest of justice.
Issues: The issues involved included the validity of the allegations made against the accused/petitioners, the need to prevent misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, and the exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent abuse of the process of law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need to scrutinize the allegations made in matrimonial disputes and warned against the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. It also highlighted the power of the High Court to quash proceedings if the person is innocent and falsely implicated, and the importance of exercising inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent abuse of the process of law and secure the ends of justice.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revision and quashed the criminal proceedings under Section 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman.

JUDGMENT

The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the charge sheet being no. 113/19 dated 31.08.2019 and the proceedings in connection therewith arising out of Coke Oven Police Station Case No. 71/19 dated 22.05.2019 pertaining to G.R. No. 773/19, under Section 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman.

The petitioner’s case is that the opposite party no. 2 is the wife of the petitioner no. 1 and the petitioner no. 2 is the mother of the petitioner no. 1, the petitioner no. 3, 4 and 5 are the brother of the petitioner no. 1 and the petitioner no. 6 is the married sister of the petitioner no. 1. It is pertinent to mention in this regard that the petitioner no. 2 that is the mother of the petitioner no. 1 is a lady aged about 92 years.

That the petitioner no. 1 got married to the opposite party no. 2 on 19.02.1995 as per Hindu rites and customs and some disputes cropped up between the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 which resulted in filing of a series of legal proceedings both by the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 against each other and/or their family members and admittedly the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 are living separately at their respective residences, since 2010 that is since the last 9 years or more. However, the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 mutually decided to settle their disputes permanently.

In the meantime, the opposite party no. 2 apparently submitted a petition of complaint under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Durgapur on April 10, 2019 being M.P. Case No. 217/2019, and pursuant to directions passed by the learned Court in the said case the instant criminal proceeding was initiated being Coke Oven Police Station Case No. 71/19 dated 22.05.2019 pertaining to G.R. No. 773/19, under Section 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code as against the petitioners herein.

The investigating agency has submitted the impugned charge sheet as against the petitioners in connection with the instant case being no. 113/19 dated 31.08.2019 under Section 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 had both mutually decided to amicably settle their disputes and to that effect the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 had entered into an agreement in writing thereby inter alia resolving that the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 would apply for mutual divorce and that the petitioner no. 1 would pay to the opposite party no. 2 a total sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lakhs) as permanent alimony in two installments and both the parties would withdraw all the pending cases between them and/or their family members including the instant criminal proceeding arising out of Coke Oven Police Station Case No. 71/19 dated 22.05.2019 and in furtherance to aforesaid, the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 have filed an application for mutual divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Court of the learned Additional District Judge at Durgapur, being Mat Suit No. 568 of 2019.

It is further submitted by the petitioners that in view of the amicable settlement so arrived between the parties that is the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2, the pendency of the instant criminal proceeding is redundant as it would be apparent that the opposite party no. 2 has filed the petition of complaint out of misunderstanding between the parties and that the petitioners, none of them, are guilty of commission of any offence which require any one or all of them to stand trial in connection with the instant proceeding, which would result in sheer miscarriage of justice.

Mr. Debashis Banerjee, learned Counsel for the Petitioners has submitted that this is a fit case for this Hon’ble Court to invoke its inherent