SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Tusar Kanti Kar & Anr vs Unknown on 17 July, 2018

1

32
17.07.2018

sm
c.no.29

CRR No.1405 of 2018

In the matter of:- Tusar Kanti Kar Anr. . … Petitioners.

Mr.Jayanta Kumar Chatterjee
Mr.Apalak Basu
Mr.Tirthankar Dey .. for the petitioners.

This is an application for quashing of an investigational proceeding in

A.G.R.No.2055 of 2017 pending before the learned Additional Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas arising out of Netaji

Nagar Police Station Case No.134 of 2017 dated 26.04.2017 under

Sections 498A/325/ 506/509./34 of the Penal Code and added Section

406 of the Penal Code.

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits

that the petitioners are the parents-in-law of the wife/opposite party no.2.

He submits that the marriage between the petitioners’ son and the

opposite party no.2 took place in the year 2013. He further submits that

within 8 days of marriage, the husband left for England and, thereafter,

Visa for the wife was refused. He submits that on 13.05.2015, the

opposite party no.2 left the house of the petitioners giving a declaration.

He submits that the husband filed a divorce suit in England, which the
2

wife decided to contest. He contends that by March, 2017 the wife was

having knowledge about the divorce suit filed by the husband

The learned Advocate submits that in retaliation to the proceeding

initiated by the husband, the opposite party no.2 initiated the present

proceeding against all the inlaws. He submits that no prima facie case is

made out against the present petitioner in the facts and circumstances of

the case and continuation of the impugned proceedings would be an

abuse of process of court.

Let a copy of this application be served upon the State through

learned Public Prosecutor, High Court, Calcutta and upon the opposite

party no.2 by speedy post with A/D within a week and file affidavit-of-

service to that effect on the next date of hearing.

Let the matter come up as a Contested Application four (4) weeks

hence.

Urgent photostat copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the

parties on usual undertaking.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)
3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation