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) 861

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.
Subhash Karmakar – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr. – Opposite Parties
CRR 800 of 2019
Decided On : 23-08-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Soumya Banerjee, Ms. Sucheta Banerjee.
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Manoranjan Mahata

The court held that the ingredients required to constitute the offences under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code are clearly absent in the present case and the allegations are general and omnibus in nature, and hence, the charge sheet is liable to be quashed.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - SECTION 498A IPC - HUSBAND AND WIFE - CRUELTY - INGREDIENTS - QUASHING OF CHARGE SHEET - COURT HELD THAT THE CHARGE SHEET WAS LACKING THE ALLEGATIONS IN ABSENCE OF THE SPECIFIC AVERMENT OF INGREDIENTS UNDER SECTION 498A OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AND AS SUCH, THE ALLEGATION UNDER SECTION 498A OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE HAS NO MANNER OF APPLICATION WITH THE PRESENT IMPUGNED PROCEEDING AND AS SUCH, THE IMPUGNED CRIMINAL PROCEEDING SHOULD BE QUASHED. THE COURT FURTHER HELD THAT THE CONTINUATION OF THIS IMPUGNED CRIMINAL PROCEEDING IS OTHERWISE BAD IN LAW AND ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the charge sheet filed against him under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the ingredients of Section 498A were not made out and the allegations were general and omnibus in nature.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the charge sheet was lacking the allegations in absence of the specific averment of ingredients under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and as such, the allegation under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code has no manner of application with the present impugned proceeding and as such, the impugned criminal proceeding should be quashed.

Issues: Whether the charge sheet filed against the petitioner under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code was valid?

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court judgments in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors., M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Ramveer Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., and Umesh Kumar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. to hold that the ingredients required to constitute the said offences are clearly absent in the present case.

Final Decision: The court allowed the revisional application and quashed the proceeding being Chakdaha Police Station Case No. 156 of 2018 dated 21.05.2018 under Section 498A/406/506 of IPC including the charge sheet, now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalyani.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the charge sheet being no. 270 of 2018 dated 22.06.2018 under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 arising out of G.R. No. 358 of 2018 corresponding to Chakdaha Police Station Case No. 156 of 2018 dated 21.05.2018 under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, now pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalyani, alternatively, for passing appropriate order by directing the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalyani to dispose of the impugned criminal proceeding being G.R. No. 358 of 2018 arising out of Kalyani Police Station Case No. 156 of 2018 dated 21.05.2018 under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The petitioner’s case is that the present prosecution case arose out of a written complaint dated 06.03.2018, lodged by the victim Smt. Indranee Roy Karmakar addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Barrackpore Police Station, alleging inter alia that her negotiated marriage through ‘Bharat Matrimonial’ was held with the petitioner on 01.08.2017. It is alleged that her uncle in law Animesh Bhattacharjee made her life miserable by committing mental torture upon her. Her mother in law took possession of her gold ornaments. Thus, she left her matrimonial home sometime in the beginning of December, 2017 due to such reasons. She further alleged that she left all her belongings which is required to be recovered. Hence, she prayed for punishment of the accused persons.

3. Initially Noapara Police Station Case No. 56 of 2018 dated 06.03.2018 under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code was started and then the case was transferred by the Ld. A.C.J.M., Barrackpore to the Court of Ld. A.C.J.M., Kalyani on 23.03.2018 for want of jurisdiction. The case was then registered as Chakdaha P.S. Case 156/18 dated 21.05.2018.

4. On 11.06.2018, the complainant prayed for return of the seized stridhan. The investigating officer produced the seizure list of the stridhan. On 25.06.2018, the complainant prayed for return of the seized articles from the police custody and the learned Magistrate directed the police to return the seized stridhan articles upon getting her ‘zimmanama’ bond. The said bond was executed on the same day and the same was accepted.

5. Charge Sheet being No. 270 of 2018 dated 22.06.2018 under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code against the husband i.e. the present petitioner, father-in-law and mother-in-law was submitted and cognizance was taken.

6. Mr. Soumya Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the charge sheet has been lacking the allegations in absence of the specific averment of ingredients under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and as such, the allegation under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code has no manner of application with the present impugned proceeding and as such, the impugned criminal proceeding should be quashed.

7. The continuation of this impugned criminal proceeding is otherwise bad in law and abuse of process of law.

8. Mr. Manoranjan Mahata, learned counsel for the State has placed the case diary.

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

10. From the materials on record and the case diary, it appears that the opposite party no. 2 in her written complaint has stated that she was mentally tortured by the petitioner and his relatives since her marriage on 01.08.2017. Her mother-in-law took all her gold ornaments. She left her matrimonial home in December, 2017 leaving all her belongings.

11. Thus, it is evident that the marriage lasted for about two months. The allegations in the written complaint are short and general in nature. The complainant has received all her articles through Court.

12. Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, lays down:-

    “498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the r

        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