The court affirmed that magistrates cannot order further investigations post-cognizance without evidence of malafide, upholding the legitimacy of the charge sheet filed under Section 498A.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred against an Order dated 08.02.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman in G.R. Case No. 1494 of 2017 arising out of Durgapur Police Station Case No. 480 of 2017 dated 17.08.2017 under Sections 498A/302/323/406/506/120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .

2. The order under revision is as follows:-

G.R. 1494/17

“Heard Ld. Advocate for the defence.

Heard Ld. APP.

It appears from case record that today Sri Maniklal Karfa, Dy. SP, CID, WB, Bankura Zone has submitted a report dated 06.02.2019 stating inter alia that he did not investigate any case related to the present incident.

Seen the order of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court delivered in connection with WP being no. 5843 of 2018.

It further appears from the case record that the IO has submitted charge sheet against the accused persons only for the offences punishable u/s 498-A/34 of the IPC. Perused the charge sheet submitted by the IO. The cognizance is accordingly taken against the accused persons for the offences punishable u/s 498-A/34 of the IPC.

Let the case record be transferred to Ld. JM, 3rd Court, Durgapur for disposal.

The copies to be supplied upon the accused persons as per provision of law in the meantime.

To 18.05.2019 for appearance before the Ld. JM, 3rd Court, Durgapur.

Sd/- ACJM, Durgapur.”

3. The petitioner’s case is that she is seriously prejudiced by the impugned Order dated 08.02.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur, Paschim Bardhaman in G.R. Case No. 1494 of 2017 arising out of Durgapur Police Station Case No. 480 of 2017 dated 17.08.2017 under Sections 498A /302 /323 /406 /506 /120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE whereby the prayer of the petitioner for further investigation has been rejected by the Learned Magistrate and cognizance has been taken and the matter has been transferred to Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Durgapur for disposal.

4. The Opposite Party No. 6 is the husband of the deceased daughter of the petitioner and the Opposite Party Nos. 7 and 8 are his parents. The Opposite Party Nos. 9 to 10 are the sisters-in-law of the deceased daughter of the petitioner.

5. The daughter of the petitioner, Srabanti Chatterjee (since deceased), was married to the Opposite Party No. 6 on 17.05.2011 according to Hindu rites and rituals and after her marriage she started living with her husband at her matrimonial home. After the marriage, the private Opposite Parties were torturing the daughter of the petitioner at her matrimonial house on the demand of the unpaid dowry. In the meantime, out of the said wedlock a female child, Ushashi Chatterjee (since deceased), was born. Despite the torture at her matrimonial home, the daughter of the petitioner did not raise any protest and tolerated the same for the future of her marital life and minor daughter.

6. On 13.11.2016 at about 6 p.m., the petitioner received information from the Opposite Party No. 6 that when he along with the daughter of the petitioner aged about 29 years and their 4 year old daughter was travelling through the National Highway – 2 on his motorcycle, a truck hit the motorcycle and his wife and daughter who were pillion riding suffered serious injuries and admitted in the hospital. Hearing such news, the husband of the petitioner rushed to the hospital and found that his daughter and granddaughter have been brought dead. The Opposite Party No. 6 was also admitted in the hospital but surprisingly he did not suffer any serious injury in comparison to his daughter and wife. Even more surprisingly, at the time of cremation of his wife and