1

91
04.02.2020

ct.32 sb

CRR 289 of 2020

In the matter of : Smt. Suhasini Chakraborty Anr.

… Petitioners.

Mr. Milon Mukherjee,
Mr. Rahul Ganguly
…For the petitioners.

Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick
… For the opposite party.

This is an application praying for quashing of a

complaint case under section 326, 403, 406 and 498A read with

section 120B of the Penal Code.

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are the parents of

the prime accused in this case. The petitioners were not aware of

the proceeding and came to learn about the impugned proceeding

much later. No enquiry was undertaken in terms of the 202 of the

Code in spite of the fact that the accused were staying beyond the

territorial jurisdiction of the learned trial court. That apart, the

offence had taken place allegedly at another place and as such, the

learned trial court lacked the territorial jurisdiction to try such
2

offence. Besides, a talk of settlement is going on between the

accused and the complainant/opposite party.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

complainant/opposite party undertakes to file Vakalatnama by

tomorrow.

Let the petitioners serve a copy of this application upon

the complainant/opposite party by speed post with

acknowledgement due, as also upon the learned advocate of the

complainant within a week. An affidavit of service to that effect

shall be filed on the next date of hearing.

Let this matter appear as a “Contested Application” two

weeks hence.

The impugned proceeding shall remain stayed for a

period of five weeks from this date.

The parties shall be at liberty to pray for extension or

modification or vacating of the interim order upon notice to the

other side.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, is to be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)