CRR 289 of 2020
In the matter of : Smt. Suhasini Chakraborty Anr.
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
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
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
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
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied
for, is to be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)