The Court upheld the addition of charges under Section 406 IPC for criminal breach of trust due to sufficient prima facie evidence regarding dowry-related allegations.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners challenging the legality and propriety of the judgment dated 22.07.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jagatsinghpur, in Criminal Revision No.02 of 2023.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

i. An F.I.R. was registered at Jagatsinghpur P.S. vide P.S. Case No. 13 of 2019 on the basis of a written report lodged by Shrabani Priyadarshini Malla @ Beura before Jagatsinghpur P.S. on 14.01.2019. In the said report, it was alleged that she had married Pravanjan Beura on 28.06.2017 and that, at the time of marriage, her father had given cash of Rs. 3,00,000/-, gold and silver ornaments, and other household articles as per the demand of her husband and in-laws. It was further alleged that subsequently her husband and father-in-law demanded an additional sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry from her parental family, which could not be fulfilled, and that she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty on that account. It was also alleged that, by use of force, her signature was obtained on a blank paper on the pretext of transfer, and that during her stay in the matrimonial home, she conceived due to a physical relationship with her husband, but her husband and in-laws compelled her to terminate the pregnancy. Upon her refusal, it was alleged that she was subjected to further torture and was seriously assaulted on 29.09.2017 at about 2.00 PM. The informant further alleged that she was driven out of the matrimonial house after being abused in filthy language and threatened with dire consequences, including threat to her life. It was also alleged that her wearing apparels were removed and, upon protest, she was assaulted by fist blows and kicks, and thereafter her husband left her at her father’s house at Jagatsinghpur. She was allegedly rescued by her father and returned with the hope that the behaviour of the accused persons would change. However, as the situation did not improve, she was constrained to lodge the F.I.R. before the IIC, Jagatsinghpur P.S., which was registered as P.S. Case No. 13 of 2019 for commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 294, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

ii. Upon completion of investigation, the concerned Police submitted a charge sheet on 19.06.2019 under Sections 498-A, 294, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, along with the case diary and other connected papers, against the present Petitioners.

iii. The learned S.D.J.M., Jagatsinghpur, on perusal of the materials on record and being satisfied that a prima facie case was made out against the Petitioners, took cognizance of the aforesaid offences by order dated 16.08.2019. Accordingly, summons were issued to the Petitioners by order dated 16.08.2019, fixing 30.09.2019 as the date for their appearance.

iv. While the matter stood thus, the learned A.P.P. filed a petition under Sections 211 and 216 of the Cr.P.C. on 21.11.2022, praying for addition of charge under Section 406 of the I.P.C., which had allegedly been omitted by the Investigating Officer at the time of submission of the charge sheet. In the said petition, it was stated that although the ingredients constituting an offence under of the I.P.C. were available from the materials on record, the charge sheet had been submitted without incorporating the said offence.

v. The Petitioners filed their objection to the said petition contending that the Investigating Officer had rightly submitted the charg