Revision against an order taking cognizance in a matrimonial case alleging domestic violence and child alienation. The High Court found prima facie case elements, requiring proof at trial, and dismissed the application.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
CRR 909 of 2020
Rabin Mondal
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
| For the Petitioner | : | Mr. Abhijit Kumar Adhya. |
|---|---|---|
| For the State | : | None. |
| For the Opposite Party No. 2 |
: | Mr. Sumanta Ganguly. |
| Heard on | : | 18.07.2023 |
| Judgment on | : | 10.08.2023 |
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:
1. The present revision has been preferred against an order passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah on 11.01.2019 taking cognizance on a complaint and thereafter transferring the said case to the Court of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Howrah who issued process after S/A on 30.08.2019 in complaint case no. 22C/2019 under
2
Sections 498A/406/323/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code (T.R. 2/19)
and also praying for quashing of the said proceedings.
2. The petitioner’s/husband’s case is that the opposite party no. 2 (complainant/wife) of the petitioner (hereinafter referred as the ‘said opposite party’) lodged a written complaint being Complaint Case No. 22C/19 on the grounds that:-
3
3. It is the case of the petitioner/husband that the said opposite party used to leave the house, without informing the other members, leaving her minor son behind with other members of family.
4. That after much persuasion and much effort he came to know from her that she was in love with another youth in the locality and wanted to marry him.
5. It is further stated that as per the wishes of the said opposite party they filed a Matrimonial Suit being No. 1247 of 2018 before the Learned
4
District & Sessions Judge, Howrah under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for mutual divorce on 11.12.2018.
6. That after filing of the said petition for mutual divorce, she left the house of the petitioner. As such a G.D.E. No. 1177 dated 24.11.2018 at Amta P.S. was registered and her parents were also informed accordingly.
7. The petitioner then came to know that the said opposite party got married to one Prasanta Mishra. As such he filed a complaint with the police, which was registered as Amta P.S. Case No. 23/19 dated 23.01.2019 under Sections 494/109 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. The petitioner states that suddenly he came to know that the instant case has been instituted by the said opposite party.
9. The complainant also filed a petition for recovery of the minor son under Section 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also filed a petition under Section 8 of the Guardians and wards Act which was numbered as Misc. Case No. 39/2019.
10. The opposite party no. 2’s/wife’s case is that:-
11. The petitioner/husband’s case is that:-
5
12. The petitioner is staying in her parents’ house after 6-7 years of marriage. Her father had also tried to settle the matter. Her child has been taken away. Her husband is allegedly having an affair with his boudi. All this prima facie show that there is prima facie case as alleged against the opposite party to proceed towards trial.
13. All these allegations, facts and materials on record, are required to be proved by way of evidence at the time of trial.
14. The revisional application being CRR 909 of 2020 is accordingly dismissed.
15. All connected applications, if any, stands disposed of.
16. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
17. Copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Trial Court for necessary compliance.
18. Urgent certified website copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all, necessary legal formalities.
(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the CPC revision should be uphold given allegations of domestic torture, separation, and alienation of minor child custody.
Whether the matters sum up to a prima facie case requiring evidence at the trial stage.
Whether the interim relief and connected applications should be disposed of.
Rabin Mondal
The State of West Bengal
Shampa Dutt (Paul)
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
