Ct. No. 30
C. R. R. 2078 OF 2015
Pratima Goswami Ors.
– vs –
The State of West Bengal Anr.
Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Avik Ghatak
….. for the Petitioners
Ms. Faria Hossain
… for the State
By the instant application the petitioners have sought for quashing of the
proceedings of G.R. Case No. 468 of 2004 arising out of Rishra P.S. Case No. 40 of 2004
dated 19.05.2004 under Section 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srerampore, Hooghly.
The facts in brief leading to the present application are that on 23rd April, 2004 the
opposite party No. 2 herein/complainant filed a petition of complaint under Section 156(3)
Cr.P.C. before the learned S.D.J.M., Srerampore alleging offences under Section 498A/406 of
the Indian Penal Code against her husband Gourab Goswami, mother-in-law Pratima
Goswami, aunts-in-law Dipali Chakraborty and Sukla Guha. On the basis of the aforesaid
complaint, Rishra P.S. Case No. 40 of 2004 dated 19.05.2004 was initiated. Investigation
culminated in the submission of the charge sheet under Section 498A/406 I.P.C. against all
the accused persons.
The petitioners herein are the mother-in-law and the two aunts-in-law of the opposite
party No. 2/complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner nos.
2 and 3 being the aunts-in-law of the complainant are in no way connected with the offences
alleged. They reside elsewhere. There is omnibus allegation against the petitioner nos. 2 and
3 who are septuagenarian.
Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party No.1/State submits that the Case
Diary reveals sufficient material against all the three petitioners. It is pointed out that the
petitioner nos. 2 and 3 would frequently visit the matrimonial home of the complainant.
In course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter may
be disposed of with a direction upon the trial Court to expedite the trial considering the fact
that the petitioners are senior citizens and there is no specific allegation of torture against
the petitioner nos. 2 and 3.
I have considered the submissions advanced with reference to the facts and
circumstances of the case. I have also taken note of the fact that the case relates to a
proceeding of the year 2004. In the circumstances, the learned trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial of G.R. Case No. 468 of 2004 and dispose of the case in accordance
with law preferably within six months from the date of communication of this order
without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
The application being C.R.R. 2078 of 2015 is thus disposed of.
Let a copy of this order be communicated forthwith to the trial Court.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the applicant
upon compliance of requisite formalities.
( Asha Arora, J.)