SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Chhangoolal Gupta vs Unknown on 18 April, 2019

1

23
18-04-2019
KB CRR No.591 of 2019

In the matter of : Chhangoolal Gupta
….. Petitioner.
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee
Mr. Arindam Ganguly
Mr. Debangan Bhattacharjee
Ms. Swarnali Saha
… For the petitioner.

This is an application praying for quashing of a

proceedings in which the charge-sheet had submitted under

Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the

petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the father-in-

law of the opposite party no.2/defacto complainant. The

marriage was solemnized between the petitioner’s son and the

opposite party no.2 took place in 2012. Soon thereafter, some

dispute cropped up between the couple. The husband lodged

a G,D. entry against the wife and her relations alleging mis-

treatment and interference in family affairs. The wife

voluntarily left the matrimonial home in 2013. Soon thereafter

the husband filed an application for restitution of conjugal

rights. He also filed under the Guardians and Wards Act

claiming guardianship of their minor child. In 2016, the
2

Court, by consent, allowed visitation right to the petitioner. In

spite of that the petitioner was not allowed to visit.

Accordingly, in 2016 several G.D. entries had to be lodged in

this regard. After all these and as a counter blast to the prior

steps taken by the husband, the opposite party no.2 filed the

instant First Information Report on 27.6.2016. No prima facie

case is made out against the present petitioner as would be

evident from the plain reading of the First Information Report

and the charge-sheet. Besides the general allegations levelled

against all the accused, the only specific allegation against the

present petitioner seems to be that as a diabetic patient, the

petitioner used to take insulin and used to carelessly leave

syringe here and there and the child could have accessed the

same. The present petitioner has been advised a hepatic

transplant. Any further continuation of the proceeding shall

be an abuse of process of Court

I have heard the learned advocate appearing on

behalf of the petitioner and have perused the revision petition.

Let the petitioner serve a copy of the petition upon

the State through learned Public Prosecutor, High Court,

Calcutta and upon the opposite party no.2 by Speed Post with

Acknowledgement Due within a week and affidavit of service

shall be filed to that effect on the next date of hearing.
3

Let this matter appear as a “Contested Application”

two weeks hence.

The impugned proceeding shall remain stayed for a

period of four weeks so far as the present petitioner is

concerned.

The parties shall be at liberty to pray for extension

or modification or vacating of the interim order upon notice to

the other sides.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if

applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance of

necessary formalities.

( Jay Sengupta, J. )

Leave a Reply

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

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