JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been filed praying for quashing of the proceeding pending before the learned Additional chief Judicial Magistrate Court at Serampur, Hooghly arising from Jangipara, P.S. Case No. 279 of 2018 dated 18.12.2018 under Section 498A/406/504/506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The petitioner No. 1 is the husband, petitioner No. 2 is the mother-in-law and petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are the sisters-in-law of the complainant/informant, who lodged a complaint/F.I.R. being No. 279/2018 dated 18.12.2018 with the Officer-in-Charge, Jangipara alleging that the defacto complainant was married to the petitioner no. 1 on 24.01.2018, according to Hindu Rites and Customs.

3. It is alleged that the petitioners had gone to the house of the opposite party no. 2 on 09.12.2018 and threatened her and also used filthy language. As such the Case has been lodged.

4. Mr. Pradyat Saha, Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the prima-facie evidences, documents are in favour of the petitioners and as such the entire proceeding is liable to be set aside/quashed against the petitioners by this Hon’ble Court.

5. The entire story of prosecution is baseless, false and same has been done only to humiliate and hamper the social life of the petitioners and if the proceeding is not quashed the petitioners shall suffer irreparable loss and injury and there will be serious miscarriage of justice.

6. Learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has not appeared inspite of notice.

7. Mr. S.G. Mukherjee learned public prosecutor has produced the case diary and has submitted that there are statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. which support the case of the complainant.

8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has filed a copy of the judgment/order dated 09.05.2022 of the Family Court No. 2, Nagpur, granting a decree of divorce to the parties in this case.

9. From the materials in the case diary, the record of the Court and the submission of the Learned Counsels for the petitioners and the State it is evident that the marriage took place on 24.01.2018.

10. The Complaint in this Case has been filed on 18.12.2018, within a year of marriage.

11. The allegation is that on 09.12.2018 at about 18.30 hrs the petitioners went to the opposite party no. 2’s house and threatened her with dire consequences.

12. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the attendance sheet of the petitioner no. 1 who was employed with the South-East-Central Railway, Nagpur Division showing that on 9th Dec, 2018 (the alleged date of incident) the petitioner no. 1 was present on duty at Nagpur. It is thus not possible to come on the same day at 18.30 hrs. (just after office hours) from Nagpur and threaten the petitioner at Jangipara, Hooghly, West Bengal, (a distance of 1,104.8 kms).

13. It is thus also not prima facie believable that just to threaten the opposite party no. 2, the petitioner no. 1 would come to Jangipara, Hooghly on the same day at 6.30 p.m. when he attended office at Nagpur.

14. As such prima facie it appears that the said allegation is not correct. Another irregularity is that inspite of being threatened allegedly on 09.12.2018, she filed the case on 18.12.2018 after a delay of almost 10 days.

15. The offences alleged in the charge sheet are under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

“498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, “cruelty” means—

(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or

(b) harassment of the wom