Criminal proceedings based on unsubstantiated allegations can be quashed to prevent abuse of the court process.

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as State are present.

2. One report has been submitted by the State showing the intimation to the opposite party No.2. Let it be kept with the record.

3. None appears on behalf of the opposite party No.2.

4. This revisional application has been filed with a prayer for quashing the proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No. 2987 of 2019 corresponding to Baguiati Police Station Case No. 384 of 2019 dated 02.10.2019 under Sections 420 /406/34 of the Indian Penal Code .

5. The application under Section 156 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code [corresponding to 175(3) of BNSS] was filed on 02.10.2019. The matter was forwarded to the jurisdictional police station wherein case was registered as Baguiati Police Station Case No. 384 of 2019 dated 02.10.2019 under Sections 420 /406/34 of the Indian Penal Code . However, after investigation chargesheet was submitted under Sections 420 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

6. The complaint was lodged contending, inter alia, that the petitioners entered into an agreement with the promoter for construction of flats in place of their old house. Upon receipt of such information on 02.09.2019, the de facto complaint/opposite party No.2 went to the house of the petitioners and inquired about the illegal act of the petitioners, but the de facto complaint/opposite party No.2 was then abused and threatened with dire consequences. On the next date i.e. 03.09.2019 at about 6.30 PM, petitioners came to the house of complainant, hurled abuses and threatened him with dire consequences. Also one purported photocopy of the Will with probate was thrown at the complainant. From that document it was found that mother-in-law executed a Will in favour of her daughter Rita Biswas on 26th April, 1989. Complainant alleged that the said deed is forged just to deprive the complainant.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has drawn my attention to the document, wherefrom it is shown that one Misc. Case being No. 261 of 2019 was filed by the complainant/opposite party No.2 with a prayer for revocation of alleged probate and subsequently the said complaint/opposite party No.2 herein filed one application under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure stating, inter alia, that entire dispute between the parties had already been patched up and he subsequently realised that testatrix voluntarily executed the Will which has already been probated by the Learned Court of District Judge, Barasat. Accordingly, complainant/opposite party No.2 expressed his wiliness not to proceed with the instant case (Misc. Case No. 261/2019). Accordingly, learned Judge allowed the application and the Misc. Case being No. 261/2019 was dismissed as withdrawn.

8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relying on the statement recorded of witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (180 of BNSS) has submitted that the application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed long after filing of the chargesheet. He raised objection against the prayer advanced on behalf of the petitioner.

9. In this case chargesheet was filed under Sections 420 /34 of the Indian Penal Code against two accused and it is reported that out of the two accused one accused Prabir Kumar Biswas died and the other accused is the petitioner of this revisional application.

10. To constitute an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code , the following ingredients have to be satisfied:

(i) the deception of any person, (ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that person to deliver any prop