SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Cal) 241

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS, J.
Ritu Verma & Anr. – Petitioner
Versus  
Nandini Soni & Anr. – Respondent
CRR 4012 of 2023
Decided On : 19-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Souvik Mitter, Adv. Mr. Achin Jana, Adv. Ms. Gargi Dhang, Adv. Mr. Suman Chakraborty, Adv. Mr. Prosenjit Ghosh, Adv. Ms. Chetna Rustagi, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra, Adv. Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhuri, Adv. Ms. Madhurai Sinha, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Debasish Roy, Learned P.P., Mrs. Rituparna De Ghose, Adv. Ms. Puja Goswami, Adv. Ms. Sreemoyi Roy, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS, J.

1. This criminal revisional application has been filed under section 397/401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 side and order dated August one, 2023 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, 3rd Court at Howrah rejected the prayer for discharge in connection with ST case No. 259 of 2019 under Sections 498/406 subsequently added charges under Section 325/308/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Factual Matrix of the case

2. The petitioner no. 1 is the married sister-in-law of the Opposite Party and is presently residing at Jaipur, Rajasthan and at the time of alleged incident she was residing far away from the matrimonial home of the de facto complainant at Bungur Lake town. The petitioner No. 2 is a distant relative of the husband of the de facto complainant and a senior citizen being aged about 66 years residing at Mukta Ram Babu Street, Kolkata, far away from the matrimonial house of the de facto complainant. The marriage between the brother of the petitioner no.1 with the Opposite Party was solemnised on December 2, 2015 according to Hindu Rights and Customs and after that they started residing at the residence of petitioner no. 1 and Post, Kolkata. The marital discord between the parties developed days after such marriage and finally on March 18, 2016 she left the matrimonial home without intimating her husband and in-laws. Despite several attempts she refused to return to her matrimonial home to lead conjugal life further. It is the petitioner’s case that the husband of the de facto complainant intimated in writing to the Posta Police Station, Kolkata stating that his wife had left the matrimonial home on March 18, 2016 with all her belongings, gold ornaments and other valuables accompanied by her brother. The husband of the de facto complainant Bharat Soni also immediate family members tried their level best to amicably settled the matrimonial discord between the parties but the Opposite Party and her family members vehemently opposed such reconciliation. After exhausting all amicable remedies, Bharat Soni the husband of the Opposite Party no.1 initiated a diverse proceeding on March 23, 2017 which is presently pending before the learned Family Court at Kolkata as matrimonial suit No. 52 of 2017. On July 15, 2017 the Opposite Party on receiving the summons of the divorce proceeding as a counter blast lodged one written complaint before Gola Bari police Station against husband, parents-in-law along with the present petitioners and one Manik Chand Kulthia since deceased with false and concocted stories. It was alleged that at the time of marriage cash of ₹ 10, 23, 300 were given with new articles and soon after the marriage her husband disclosed about his with lady from Bhawanipur . It was also alleged that the parents-in-law and all the petitioners demanded for a separate large from the de facto complainant and as she could not meet such demand she was abused and assaulted. When the parents of the de facto complainant came to mitigate the matter they were also abused and driven away. She further alleged that she was denied proper nutrition and medication which took a toll on her health and she became sick and certain drugs were administered on June 29, 2015 by her mother-in-law and sister-in-law which caused severe convulsions, vomiting and bleeding. She was taken to Dr. Kothari by her parents and it was informed that wrong medicine was administered and she remained under treatment for two months at her paternal home. After that she was again taken by her husband and she became pregnant but husband and in-laws wanted her to undergo abortion and being refused she was assaulted and provided no food. It was further alleged that in the first week of March, 2016 her in-laws drove her out of the matrimonial home. After that on March, 2016 the husband and other in-laws visited her home and they joined assaulted her and her abdomen to kill the baby and then she was trea

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