SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

(Hemanta Naskar & Ors vs State & Anr.) on 4 August, 2017


39 04.08.2017
an Court No. 34

CRR 1127 of 2015
(Hemanta Naskar Ors.


State anr.)

Mr. Arnab Chatterjee
Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhury
…….. For the petitioner

Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukhopadhyay, Ld. P. P.

Mr. Abhra Mukherjee
………For the State

Heard the parties in part at length.

According to the petitioner, the FIR itself does not speak of any

ingredient of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. He has also submitted above

the previous litigations. According to him, the suit under Section 13B of Hindu

Marriage Act was initiated in which the present opposite party had put her

signature. The opposite party wife also appeared before the learned trial court in

some occasions. Thereafter, she did not appear before the learned trial court.

Subsequently, the present petitioner has filed a divorce suit under Section 13 of the

Hindu Marriage Act and he got a decree ex parte.

The grievance of the defacto-complainant is such that on 24.02.2013,

the petitioner’s father assaulted the defacto-complainant’s father and, thereafter,

her father-in-law, under compulsion, procured her signature in the P.S. itself.

Inspite of that allegation, she lodged complaint on 14.11.2014, i.e., nearly after one

year and nine months of the alleged incident.

The learned Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary and

practically left the matter for the discretion of the court. The said case diary speaks

that the neighbours’ statements were recorded by the I.O. concerned and those

witnesses did not speak of any ingredient either of Sections 498A or 406 of the

Indian Penal Code. They have unequivocally stated that there was some exchange

of words between the rival groups. The hot exchange of words between the rival

groups does not come within the ambit of either Sections 498A or 406 of the Indian

Penal Code.

Hence, the CRR stands allowed. The proceedings being G.R. case no.

2621/2014 stand quashed accordingly.

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.

(Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, 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Your email address will not be published.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
MyNation Times Magzine

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


Copyright © 2024 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