SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Anitbaran Hom vs Unknown on 21 August, 2019

1

46 21.08.2019
A.B. Ct.No.34

C.R.R. 3381 of 2006

In the matter of:- Anitbaran Hom

None appears for the petitioner. No accommodation is sought for.

The revisional application has been preferred against the order dated

20.08.2005 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Court,

Bidhannagar in connection with G.R. Case No. 74 of 2004 arising out of

Lake Town Police Station Case No. 288 dated 19.11.2004 under Sectionsections

494, Section498A, Section506 and Section120B of the Indian Penal Code and the order dated

21.8.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Seventh

Court, Barasat in Criminal Motion No. 118 of 2005.

An application under Sectionsection 239 of the Code Criminal Procedure

was preferred by the accused/petitioner before the learned Magistrate for

discharging him from the case. The learned Magistrate vide order dated

20.8.2005 was pleased to dismiss the said application holding that the

materials submitted along with the charge sheet disclosed mental torture

for demand of dowry.

Challenging the said order the accused/petitioner preferred a

revisional application before the learned Sessions Judge, Barasat, 24

Parganas (North) which was finally heard out by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, 7th Court, Barasat and by an order dated 21.8.2006, the

learned Sessions Court was pleased to dismiss the revisional application,

holding that the materials collected by the investigating agency and the

observations made by the learned Magistrate while disposing of the

application under Sectionsection 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not

suffer from any illegality and as such the same is dismissed.

In view of both the Courts below scrutinizing the records and coming

to a conclusion, this Court under Sectionsection 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure is empowered to interference only if a substantial question of law

is involved on the foundation of facts of a particular case. As the petitioner
2

has failed to make out any case of such nature this Court do not find any

reason to interfere with the same.

Accordingly, criminal revisional application being C.R.R. 3381 of

2006 is dismissed. Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation