CRR 1826 of 2018
Waqar Mohammad Khan ors.
The State of West Bengal anr.
Mr. Soumya Roy,
Mr. Rajnil Mukherjee,
Mr. Shantanu Dutta,
Mr. Goutam Roy,
Mr. Uttam Basak,
…for the petitioners
This application is for quashing of a proceeding being GR case no. 1534 of
2016 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Durgapur arising out of Durgapur Police Station case no. 459 of 2016 under
Sections 147/148/149/323/ 324/379/427/458/506/120B of the Indian
Learned advocate for the revisionists submits that the daughter of the
revisionist was given marriage to the family of the defacto complainant. The
daughter of revisionist was subsequently driven out following a matrimonial
discord between the parties. In consequence thereof, the daughter of the
revisionist filed a proceeding under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and
filed also a separate proceeding praying for maintenance under Section 125 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. The pending proceeding in which the
revisionist have been made accused is nothing but a counter-blast to the
litigation, initiated already at the instance of the daughter of the revisionist.
Thus, according to the revisionists, the accused persons have been falsely
implicated in this case without any basis. Admittedly, the charge sheet in this
case has already been submitted against the accused persons making out a
case under Sections 147/148/149/323/ 324/379/427/458/506/ 120. The
trial court is now under obligation to frame charge, if there prima-facie exists,
which are said to have been collected in course of investigation by the
investigating officer. True it is that there is relationship between the defacto
complainant and the revisionists and that relationship turned into hostile soon
after the birth of a proceeding under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code
and 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the instance of the daughter of
the revisionists. Since implication of the accused without any justifiable basis
is the crux of contention in this case, which cannot be naturally and effectively
decided without having a look at the materials, if any collected in course of
investigation. The court is of the view, the revisionists are not remediless at
this moment. There is enough scope left open before the trial court to agitate
the point, now raises. Since there is no apparent irregularities or illegalities in
support of the instant prosecution, more so there is no defect to the initiation
of the instant proceeding, the prayer for quashing, as suggested by the
revisionists, is not encouraging one, and as such the same is refused.
However, the purpose of justice will be best sub-served by passing the
The revisionists are at liberty to agitate the points now, raises at the time
of framing of charge before the learned trial court, and if any point is raised at
the instance of the revisionists/accused, the same shall be duly addressed by
the learned Magistrate by passing a reasoned order after giving adequate
opportunity to prosecution.
Learned Magistrate is directed to fix a date as expeditiously as possible for
consideration of the charge giving sincerest effort to that effect for the purpose.
With this observation and direction, the revisional application stands
disposed of. No order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the
parties, upon compliance of necessary formalities.
(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)