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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 11661

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
SUMANLAL KODIALBAIL AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR – Respondent
CRR 3747 / 2022



IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE CRR 3747 of 2022 With CRAN 1 of 2025 Sumanlal Kodialbail & Ors Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv Ms. Aditya Ratan Tiwary Mr. Suman Majumder Ms. Santanu Thakur For the State : Mr. Debasisi Roy, Ld. PP Mr. Imran Ali Ms. Puspita Saha For the Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Subrata Bhattacharya Mr. Indanuj Dutta Heard on : 06.08.2025 Judgement on : 20.08.2025 Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.

1. The instant application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred assailing the proceeding being Burdwan Women Police Station Case No. 403, dated August 21st, 2022 under section

498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) pending before CJM, Purba Burdwan.

2. On August 21, 2022 the opposite party no. 2 herein lodged an FIR against the petitioners herein inter alia on the allegations that since after the marriage of opposite party no. 2 with the petitioner no. 1 herein, the opposite party no. 2 has been subjected to mental and physical torture by the petitioners herein. Due to such continuous torture and oppression opposite party no.2 had to leave her matrimonial home and thereafter she took shelter at Burdwan. It has been further alleged that all the stridhan belongings of the opposite party no. 2 are forcefully kept at the matrimonial house of the opposite party no.2. It is also alleged that the petitioner no. 1 being the husband of defacto complainant/opposite party no.2, had also cheated the father of the opposite party no.2, for which he had to face huge monetary loss. It has also been alleged that on 7th July, 2022 the petitioner no. 1 herein reached Burdwan and called the opposite party no.2, when she was on medical call. The opposite party no.2 after getting such call from petitioner no.1/her husband, rushed to her rented house. It is further alleged that suddenly petitioner no. 1 slapped the complainant/opposite party no.2 herein and started kicking her on her leg thereby thrashed her on ground and tempted to throttle the opposite party no.2 with intention to kill her. The victim/opposite party no.2 raised alarm and when the neighbours reached the spot, the petitioner no. 1 left the place.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned proceeding, Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the de facto complainant has an extra marital affair and after coming to know about such illicit relation the petitioner no.1/husband raised objection, when the opposite party no.2 became violent and threatened the petitioner no.1 with dire consequences. The Opposite party no. 2 herein is residing at present with the person with whom she has extra marital affair at Burdwan. He further submits that the petitioner no. 1 got married to the opposite party no. 2 on 26.05.1997 and from the said wed lock two children were born who are residing with the petitioner no. 1. On 14.05.2019 said opposite party no.2/complainant eloped with her paramour with money and jewelleries as would be evident from the complaint so lodged by the self- same opposite party no. 2 with the superintendent of Police sector 6, Gandhi Nagar, Gujarat on May, 17, 2019. Subsequently she also lodged another FIR on January 16, 2021 against the opposite party no. 1 herein under sections 420/406/467/468/471 of the IPC but in the said FIR there is no whisper of mental torture during the entire period. The petitioner no.1/ accused further contended that he is a resident of Gandhinagar, Gujarat where he resides with his old ailing mother being the petitioner no. 2 herein and with his two children whom the opposite party no. 2 herein has abandoned.

4. Mr. Bhattacharya accordingly submits that it is evident that the present proceeding is a malicious attempt on behalf of the opposite party no.2 to implicate the petitioners in any manner in order to expose the

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