IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)

CRR 348 of 2024 Smt. Pratusha Das @ Prattusha Das -Vs-

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Avrojyoti Das, Mr. Rajdeep Das, Mr. Soumajit Ghosh.

For the State : Mr. Abhijit Sarkar, Ms. Saikat Chatterjee.

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee, Mr. Haider Ali, Mr. Satyam Sarkar.

Hearing concluded on : 25.04.2025 Judgment on : 29.04.2025 Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceedings, being G.R. Case No. 4874 of 2023 in connection with Siliguri Police Station Case No. 976 of 2023 dated 03.12.2023 under Sections 498A/307/376/511/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Siliguri.

2. The De facto Complainant/Opposite Party no.2’s case in the written complaint dated 03.12.2023 is that the De-facto Complainant got married with brother of the Petitioner on 07.02.2022 according to Hindu rites and customs. Since the inception of her marriage the De-facto complainant realized that the brother of the Petitioner is alcoholic and after knowing such fact when the De-facto complainant raised voice against such act and due to such protest the brother of the Petitioner along with her in- laws started abusing the De-facto complainant. After marriage the Petitioner, her in-laws and brother of the Petitioner creating pressure upon the De-facto complainant to get Rs. 10 Lacs from her parental house and when the De-facto complainant refused to do so, the brother of the Petitioner, her in-laws and the present Petitioner tried to kill the De-facto complainant. On 01.12.2023 at about 1:00am the brother of the Petitioner along with his parents had allegedly tried to smother the De-facto Complainant with a pillow. Hence the Complaint.

3. From the materials on record including the case diary and memo of evidence it appears that there is no allegation of offence under Section 307 IPC against the petitioner, who is the sister-in-law (Nanad) of the De facto Complainant.

4. The allegations of cruelty under Section 498A IPC are also general in nature.

5. Section 498A of IPC, lays down:-

“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 purpose 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 woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

Ingredients of offence. -The essential ingredients of the offence under sec. 498A are as follows:-

(1) A woman was married;

(2) She was subjected to cruelty;

(3) Such cruelty consisted in -

(i) any lawful conduct as was likely to drive such woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health whether mental or physical;

(ii) harm to such woman with a view to coercing her to meet unlawful demand for property or valuable security or on account of failure of such woman or any of her relations to meet the lawful demand;

(iii) the woman was subjected to such cruelty by her husband or any relation of her husband.”

6. In Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Ors. vs State of Telangana & Anr., in Criminal Appeal No. ………… of 2024 (arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 16239 of 2024, decided on December 10, 2024, the Supreme Court held:-

“15