SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Arup Sarkar & Ors vs Unknown on 1 March, 2019


171 01.03.2019

C.R.R. 2750 of 2018
SB Court 29
In the matter of : Arup Sarkar Ors.

Mr. Ayan Bhattacharyya
Ms. Manaswita Mukherjee …. For the Petitioners

This is an application for quashing of a proceeding where a

charge sheet has been submitted under sections 498A, 420, 506 read

with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners

submits that the petitioner no. 2 is the husband and petitioner nos. 2

and 3 are the parents in law of the de facto complainant / wife. The

learned advocate submits that on 22.04.2016 a marriage was

registered between the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2

under the Special Marriage Act. On 16.01.2017 the opposite party no.

2 filed an application under section 25 of the Special Marriage Act

praying for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of nullity. He

submits that in the same petition the opposite party no. 2 had

categorically averred that after the marriage the parties resided at their

respective paternal residential addresses and as such marriage was

never consummated, it was agreed between the parties that both the

spouses would live in their respective paternal addresses till they

became completely financially established and that they would meet

each other, yet they would never reside as husband and wife for a

single moment. The learned advocate submits that contrary to such

averments, the present opposite party no. 2 made one allegations

against the present petitioners in the instant First Information Report.

The averments and allegations as contained in the First Information

Report are totally incompatible with the stand taken in the application

under section 25 of the Special Marriage Act. The learned advocate

also refers to an earlier First Information Report lodged by the present

opposite party no. 2 where a charge sheet was submitted under

sections 323, 341 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that

the averments regarding what happened on the relevant date i.e.

31.05.2017 are totally different in the two First Information Reports. He

submits that no prima facie case is made out against the present

petitioners as would be evident from the plain reading of the First

Information Report and the charge sheet and any further continuation

of the impugned proceeding shall be an abuse of the process of the


Let the petitioner serve a copy of this application upon the State

through the learned Public Prosecutor and upon the opposite party no.

2 by speed post with acknowledgement due, within a week. An

affidavit of service to that effect shall be filed on the next date of


Let this matter appear under the heading ‘Contested Application’

two weeks hence.

The impugned proceeding shall remain stayed for a period of six

weeks from this date.

Liberty is granted to the parties to pray for extension or

modification or variation or vacating of the interim order upon notice to

the other side.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to

the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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