SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri Partha Pritam Pal @ Partha … vs Smt. Kanika Mondal Nee Sikdar Nee … on 11 July, 2018

1

11.07
M 2018
C.R.R. 1334 of 2018

Sri Partha Pritam Pal @ Partha Pritom Pal

-Vs-

Smt. Kanika Mondal Nee Sikdar Nee Pal Anr

Mr. Bikram Banerjee,
…. For the Petitioner.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner prays

for leave to correct the cause title, which is granted.

This is an application for quashing of an investigational

proceeding in Barasat Women Police Station Case No. 121 of 2017

dated 23rd August, 2017 under Sections 498A376/417/323/324/371

and 506 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to G.R. Case No.

2738 of 2017 now pending before the Court of the learned Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate at Barasat, North 24 Parganas.

A charge sheet dated 21st February 2018 has been filed in this

case.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits that the opposite party no. 1 has been filing vexatious

complaints one after the other against the present petitioner over the

same issue. He submits that although the de facto complainant filed

the instant proceeding under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code
2

and other sections, over the self same allegations and with a little bit

of embellishment she filed a second First Information Report being

Dumdum Police Station case no. 843 dated 23rd August, 2017 but

under Sections 376/417 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act. That second First Information Report had resulted

in a final report that prayed for discharge for accused/petitioner. He

submits that she did not stop at that and filed a third First

Information Report being Barasat Woman P.S. Case No. 121 dated

23rd August, 2017 under Sections 376/417/323/324/371/506 of the

Indian Penal Code. He submits that in both the subsequent F.I.Rs.

she had suppressed about filing any other F.I.R.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits that no prima face case is made out against the present

petitioner as would be evident from a plain reading of the F.I.R. and

the charge sheet and in view of the submission of final report in

respect of the second F.I.R., further continuation of the present

proceeding would be an abuse of the process of law.

I have heard the submissions of the learned advocate appearing

on behalf of the petitioner and have gone through the revisional

application including its annexures.

Let the petitioner serve a copy of the application to the State

through Learned Public Prosecutor and upon the opposite party no. 1
3

by speed post with AD within a week.

An affidavit to that effect shall be filed on the next date of

hearing.

Let the proceeding in G.R. Case No. 2738 of 2017 now pending

before the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at

Barasat, North 24 Parganas remain stayed for a period of eight weeks

from this date.

Let this matter come up for hearing as ‘Contested Application’

four weeks hence.

The parties shall be at liberty to pray for extension of

modification or vacation of the interim order upon notice to the other

side.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be

furnished to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of

all necessary formalities.

( Jay Sengupta, 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

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

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation