In The High Court At Calcutta
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
CRR 1320 of 2019
State of West Bengal Anr.
Mr. Dipankar Aditya
Mr. Rajesh Jana
Ms. Tina Biswas
… for the petitioner.
Mr. Ranabir Roychowdhury
… for the State.
This is an application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure
Code whereby the petitioner has challenged the Order No. 13 dated March 15, 2019 passed by
the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 3rd Court at Barasat in Criminal Appeal No. 38
The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this application to the State/opposite party no.
1 through Mr. Ranabir Roychowdhury in the course of the day.
Now I have heard learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Ranabir Roychowdhury,
learned advocate appearing for the State. This revisional application is taken up for consideration
on its merit.
The petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 are husband and wife and after their marriage
the petitioner accompanied by his wife/opposite party no. 2 went for five days honeymoon trip on
February 12, 2002 at Shimla-Kulu-Manali. Allegedly the opposite party no. 2/wife started
quarrelling with the petitioner/husband in Shimla blaming on to his family members and even
alleging on to his dark complexion. So, the relationship between the petitioner and the opposite
party no. 2 became sour. Both the husband and wife live together and in the course of their
marital tie the opposite party no. 2 gave birth to a child.
Thereafter, even in the month of February 2004 which he accompanied by the opposite
party no. 2/wife went to attend the marriage ceremony of a near relative of the opposite party no.
2, she created untoward situation at Howrah Railway Station. Thus, the petitioner/husband had
lost all his hope for reconciliation and he had filed an application for judicial separation before
the Court of Learned District Judge, Barasat, North 24-Parganas ( vide Mat. Suit No. 979 of
2004). However, the said suit was withdrawn at the intervention of Women’s Commission and
they started happy conjugal life. Subsequently, in the month of March 2008, the opposite party
no. 2/wife accompanied by her brother went to the office of the petitioner/husband and
misbehaved and abused him in presence of the staff. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a matrimonial
suit being Matrimonial Suit No. 218 of 2009 for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under
Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Thereafter, the opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint
under Sections 498A/Section323/Section325/Section406 IPC which resulted in charge-sheet after due investigation
the case was duly heard on trial and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate by his
judgement dated June 21, 2017 acquitted the petitioner/accused of the charges under Sections
498A/Section323/Section325/Section406 IPC. The said judgement was thereafter appealed against by the opposite
party no. 2 before the learned Sessions Judge, North 24-Parganas and the same is registered as
Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2017. On behalf of the State an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 38 of
2017 was also preferred under Section 384 CrPC.
The defacto complainant filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2017 on the
ground that the appeal under Section 372 CrPC is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed as
the appellant had no authority to file the instant appeal without the leave of the learned District
Magistrate or the State Government or special leave from the Hon’ble High Court. The said appeal
was taken into consideration by the impugned order and the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
F.T.C-3, Barasat upon hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records was of the view that
the appeal has been preferred by the State admitted on July 30, 2017 by the learned Sessions
Judge. So, it can be presumed that learned Sessions Judge on being satisfied about fulfillment of
the criteria has been pleased to admit the same.
However, there is scope for the present respondent to ventilate the matter at the time of
final hearing of the appeal. But when the appeal has been admitted the court has no other option
but to hear it on merit as envisaged u/s 384 385 of the SectionCrPC.
It is further observed that the facts, grounds and reliefs of both the appeals are same and
identical. Earlier appeal has been registered as Crl. Appeal No. 37 of 2017 if heard together with
the appeal preferred by the State being Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2017 there will be no prejudice
or technical flaws as ventilated by the opposite party in this case may be considered at
penultimate stage of the appeal and with this observation the learned Additional Sessions Judge
fixed both the appeals to be heard together on May 3, 2019.
I do not fine any ground in this revisional application to be entertained since he matter on
merit can be taken up at the penultimate stage of hearing of the appeal.
Accordingly, the revisional application being CRR 1320 of 2019 is dismissed.
The learned Court below is directed to hear out the appeals as expeditiously as possible.
Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties after
completion of all legal formalities.
sh ( Shivakant Prasad, J.)