Quashed

Mithu Singha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC19 Dec 2022CRR/176/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge quashed proceedings against 12 accused (including in-laws, relatives, and friends) in a matrimonial discord case, directing continuation of trial only against the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law, citing lack of specific evidence against others.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against 12 named accused persons are quashed; proceedings against husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law are directed to continue.

Mithu Singha and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

19-12-2022 Subha Item no.35 Ct no.34

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction

¶3

CRR 176 of 2021

¶4

Smt . Mithu Singha & Ors. -versusThe State of West Bengal & Anr.

¶5

Re : An application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

¶6

Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta Mr. Sougata Mitra Mr. Rameswar Sinha Ms. Sofia Nesar Mr. Santanu Sett ……for the petitioners. Mr. S. G. Mukherji, ld. PP, Mr. Imran Ali Ms. Debjani Sahu …..for the State.

¶7

The present revisional application has been preferred challenging the proceedings arising out of Purulia(T) Police Station Case No. 15 of 2019 dated 20.02.2019 under Sections 498A/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶8

In connection with the investigation of the said case, the Investigating Agency on completion of investigation submitted chargesheet against the 15 accused persons.

¶9

The accused persons include not only the husband, motherin-law, but also uncle-in-law, aunt-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-inlaw and friends of the husband.

¶10

Having considered the facts of the present case, the genesis of the case arising from matrimonial discord and that the chargesheet has been submitted under Sections 498A/506/34 IPC, I am of the

¶11

¶12

opinion that the Investigating Agency should have been more cautious while implicating such huge number of accused persons on the basis of very general/omnibus allegations.

¶13

The factum of demand of dowry, mental and physical torture inflicted is restricted to the inmates of the matrimonial home and the same has got nothing to do with far of relations or married sister-inlaw who are staying at different far-off places, so also the friends, who have been named herein should not be implicated in a matrimonial discord until and unless there are specific allegations against them regarding their overt act or participation in inflicting physical and mental torture .

¶14

Bare threatening of dire consequences should be elaborated when members out of the family are being implicated in cases under 498A of the Indian Penal Code and for the same it was incumbent to the police authorities to collect evidence from the independent sources and just not restrict themselves to the allegations made in the FIR.

¶15

Having regard to the peculiar manner in which the investigation has been conducted, and wherein 15 accused persons have been roped in which include far of family members and friends of the husband, I am of the opinion that the instant proceedings for the present should not be allowed to be continued against the petitioners who have approached this court.

¶16

Accordingly, the proceedings against the following persons are hereby quashed :-

¶17

1. Arijit Banerjee @ Benu 2. Prabir Panda 3. Tanuja Panda 4. Mithu Singh 5. Abijit Singh @ Hira 6. Panu Singh @

¶18

¶19

Satyajit 7. Rirya @ Nobinita Singh 8. Neha Singh @ Kousimita Singh 9. Biswajit Mukherjee @ Bisu 10. Mukta Singh 11. Soumitrya Singh 12. Indrani Singh.

¶20

So far as the proceedings against the husband, namely, Surajit Singh , father-in-law, namely, Kiriti Prasad Singh and mother-in-law, Minati Singh would continue in accordance with law .

¶21

However, the learned Magistrate in seisin of the matter is not precluded from impleading any person as an accused person if specific evidence against such person surfaces in course of the evidence. The learned Magistrate at that stage would invoke the provisions under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶22

The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purulia or the jurisdictional court in seisin of the matter is directed to frame charges against them and proceed with the trial of the case taking the same to its logical conclusion.

¶23

With the aforesaid observations, the present revisional application being CRR 176 of 2021 is allowed.

¶24

Report so filed by the SI of Police, Purulia(T) PS through the learned advocate for the State be kept with the record.

¶25

Pending applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.

¶26

All concerned parties are to act in terms of a copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.

¶27

[Tirthankar Ghosh, J]

¶28

Mithu Singha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithu Singha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Ranjan Maity Vs State of West Bengal and Another

Sukumar Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Swapan Kumar Das and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Soumen Dutta Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Syed Siraj Ali Vs Momtaz Chowdhury(Begam) and Anr.

Nasira Gazi Vs State of West Bengal