Single judge dismissed the Criminal Revision application challenging the affirmation of a protection order under the PW(S) Act. The court held identity is a fact for trial and dismissed the revision while vacating the interim order.
Revisional application dismissed; interim order vacated; parties to produce evidence at trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
29-03-2022 Subha Item-6 Ct -.34
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
C.R.R 662 of 2019
In Re : An application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
In the matter of : Sankar Pramanik @ Shankar Paramanik …….. petitioner.
Mr. Soumyajit Chatterjee ……for the Petitioner.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta Ms. Sofia Nesar Mr. Santanu sett …for the opposite party no.2/wife.
Mr. S. S. Imam Mr. S. Kundu
……for the State.
Report submitted by the Officer-in-Charge, women Police Station, Barrackpore Police Commissionerate through the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State be kept with the record.
The present revisional application was preferred against the order dated 22.01.2019 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 4th Court, Barasat in Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2018 wherein the learned appellate court was pleased to affirm the order dated 03.02.2018 passed in C. Case No. 106 of 2017 under Section 12 of the PWDV Act, 2005.
The main contention of the petitioner was regarding the identity of the lady and the different names she has expressed for
2
obtaining the reliefs under the said Act.
The issue as contended by the learned advocate for the petitioner needs to be addressed in course of the trial and cannot be summarily decided as an interim measure.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, learned advocate appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and submits that there are sufficient materials regarding the identity of the present opposite party. This court need not go on the issue regarding the challenge of identity of the applicant before the learned trial court as the said issue is a question of fact which is to be rebutted by the husband/petitioner herein and/or established by the applicant/opposite party.
The learned Magistrate after perusal and consideration of the materials on record, which surfaced at the preliminary stage granted certain interim relief. The said order was appealed before the learned sessions court.
Having regard to the findings made by the learned Magistrate as well as the appellate court and the report submitted by the concerned Officer of Women Police Station, Barrackpore Police Commissionerate, I do not find any reason to interfere at this early stage of the proceedings. Both the parties would produce their evidence at the relevant stage of the trial.
Accordingly, the revisional application being CRR 662 of 2019 is dismissed.
All pending applications, if any, in connection with the
3
revisional application, are consequently disposed of.
Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.
All parties are to act in terms of a website copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.
( Tirthankar Ghosh, J. )
4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the identity of the woman applicant requires summary decision or trial.
Whether the interim relief granted by the lower court warrants interference at this stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sankar Pramanik @ Shankar Paramanik
Opposite party no.2/wife
State
Tirthankar Ghosh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
