1
12 13.08.2019
CRR 1318 of 2019
an Court No. 33
(Dr. Sanchita Ghosh anr. vs. State anr.)
with
CRAN 2601 of 2019
Mr. Y. J. Dastoor, learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharya
Mr. Somsuvra Mukherjee
… for the petitioners
Ms. Baisali Basu
… for the State
The revisionist is aggrieved by an order dated 12.04.2019 in the instant
criminal revisional application initially when the learned court below directed
service of notice on the other side, an application being CRAN 2601 of 2019 has
been filed seeking stay of further proceedings in G.R. Case No. 829/2013 arising out
of Chandannagar Police Station case No. 174/2013 dated 08.07.2013 under
Sections 420/Section406/Section120B of the Indian Penal Code.
The alleged criminal revisional application was filed seeking quashing of
entire proceedings as directed against the impugned order. By the impugned order,
the learned court below declined the application for discharge filed by the petitioner
wife.
The brief facts relevant for the purpose of the instant revisional
application are that the petitioner was married to the opposite party/complainant’s
son on 08.09.1998. She was thereafter, alleging torture by her husband and left the
matrimonial house in 2012. Proceedings under Sections 498A/Section406 of the Indian
Penal Code have been initiated and chargesheet has been filed and the trial has
commenced.
Thereafter, on 08.07.2013, four months after the filing of the
chargesheet, the opposite party/mother-in-law alleged that the revisionist has
2
cheated or misappropriated a golden mukut that was temporarily given to her to
wear. In a statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, the complainant had also stated that she had intended the said golden
mukut to pass on to the daughter-in-law, revisionist, after her death.
After investigation, recording of statements of witnesses including
independent witnesses, the Police submitted a chargesheet in respect of the
complaint lodged by the opposite party mother-in-law.
The revisionist argued before the trial court in the discharge application
as also before this court that the said golden mukut is in fact stridhan property
which she is entitled to claim and retain since it is evident from the statement of the
mother-in-law recorded by the Police that the said golden mukut was in addition to
other stridhan ornaments given to the revisionist in course of the marriage.
The revisionist would also argue that the said golden mukut would
therefore, become a part and parcel of the stridhan property.
This court is of the view that the statement of the complainant that the
said golden mukut was intended to be passed on to the daughter-in-law after the
death of mother-in-law cannot be brushed aside lightly. Whether it should be
looked at in conjunction with the other stridhan articles or independently, is a
question have to be decided in course of trial.
In any event, an intention of giving a property or article to somebody
post the death of a person is in the nature of a bequest that shall take effect after
the death of the person giving. Such desire and/or wish is admittedly recognized in
law, to be changeable even during the lifetime of a person.
By reason thereafter, this court is of the view that it cannot be
established at this stage without a trial that the said golden mukut was in fact
intended to be stridhan property.
Hence, the revisional application must fail. The impugned order is
3
upheld.
The trial itself shall be expedited. The learned court below shall proceed
to dispose of the trial within a period of six months. from the date of communication
of the copy of this order wholly and completely uninfluenced by any observation
made hereinabove. The observations made herein are merely prima facie and for
the purpose of deciding whether the discharge application was decided by the
learned court below in accordance with law. The trial, if necessary, shall be
conducted on a day-to-day basis.
With the above observations, the instant criminal revisional application
stands disposed of. Accordingly, the application being CRAN 2601 of 2019 also
stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given
to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)