IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION Appellate Side Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta C.R.R. 2381 of 2022 Rakhi Sardar & Ors.

Versus The State of West Bengal & Another For the Petitioners : Mr. Malay Bhattacharya, Adv.

Ms. Sudipta Sengupta, Adv.

For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Aniket Mitra, Adv.

Mr. Kaushik Saha, Adv.

Mr. Kaushik Karmakar, Adv.

For the State : Mrs. Anasuya Sinha, Adv.

Mr. Sachit Talukdar, Adv.

Heard on : 02.09.2025 Judgment on : 26.09.2025 Ajay Kumar Gupta, J:

1. The four Petitioners/accused have preferred this Criminal Revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short ‘Cr.P.C.’), seeking quashing of the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 6906 of 2017 corresponding to Special Case No. SPL- 156/2021 arising out of Shibpur Police Station Case No. 597 of 2017 dated 02.12.2017 under Sections 341/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(i)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, pending before the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Howrah –cum- Special Judge on SC & ST (POA) Act, Howrah and all orders passed therein in connection with the instant case.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of this case are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this case are as under: -

a. This is a peculiar case, where the husband of petitioner no.1 has lodged a written complaint dated 2nd December, 2017, before the Shibpur Police Station against his wife and in-laws. The written complaint was treated as a First Information Report and, accordingly, Shibpur Police Station Case No. 597/2017 dated 02.12.2017 under Sections 341/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was registered against the accused persons.

b. In the written complaint, it has been alleged that the complainant/Opposite party no.2 belongs to the Schedule Tribe Community, sub-caste Santal. He married petitioner no. 1 on 30th July, 2007, and a girl child was born out of the wedlock. It was further alleged that soon after marriage, petitioner no. 1/his wife used to taunt him about his caste and addressed him as “Junglee”.

c. On 28th November, 2017 at about 11.30 PM, when the complainant enquired about his medicine, the petitioner no. 1 allegedly became furious and abused him in filthy language, called the other petitioners and together they assaulted the complainant with fists and blows, causing injuries that required medical treatment.

d. The petitioners, however, contended that the allegations are wholly false and fabricated. On the contrary, it was the complainant/opposite party no. 2 who, soon after marriage, inflicted cruelty on petitioner no. 1 by making unlawful demands for dowry. Petitioner no. 1 had earlier lodged several complaints with the local police station in this regard. On 20th April, 2017, the opposite party no. 2 allegedly assaulted petitioner no. 1 mercilessly, leading to her hospitalisation. Finding no alternative, petitioner no. 1 lodged a written complaint before Shibpur Police Station, which was registered as P.S. Case No. 193/2017 dated

20.04.2017 under Sections 498A/325/406 IPC.

e. The petitioners further contended that immediately after the petitioner no. 1 lodged the complaint dated 20.04.2017, the opposite party no. 2, in retaliation and without any valid reason, instituted a Matrimonial Suit under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Court of Learned District Judge, Howrah on the next day i.e. 21.04.2017 and the said case was registered as Matrimonial Suit No - 408 of 2017. According to the petitioners, the Matrimonial Suit is nothing but an afterthought, filed only to mentally harass her following the complaint lodged by Petitioner no. 1.

f. Thus, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the Proceeding being GR Case No. 6906/2017 corresponding to Special Case no SPL- 156/2021 and all orde