BISWAJYOTI CHATTERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The Appellant has approached this Court being aggrieved by the Order dtd. 23/2/2024 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in CRR No. 639/2024 filed under Sec. 402 r/w 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, ("CrPC"), whereby the Hon'ble High Court refused to discharge the Appellant in FIR No. 13/2015 dt. 14/12/2015 registered with Mahila Police Station, Haldia, District Purba MDP, Sub Div. Haldia under Ss. 376/417/506 IPC ("FIR") and dismissed the Revision Petition against Order dt. 4/1/2024 passed by the Ld. District & Sessions Judge, Purba Mednipur at Tamluk in Sessions Case No. 198/2023.

(3.) The Appellant is a former judicial officer who has superannuated from the post of Civil Judge (Senior Division), City Civil Court, Calcutta. The FIR was registered at the behest of the Respondent no.2/Complainant, who has alleged that it was in 2014, during the pendency of the litigation arising out of a marital discord with her ex-husband, that she came in contact with the Appellant, then posted as ACJM, Haldia, Dist. Purba, Medinipur. It is the case of the Complainant that the Appellant, who was also separated from his wife, had assured the Complainant/Respondent no.2 that he will marry her and will take complete responsibility of her and her son from the first marriage, as his own, once she gets divorced. The Appellant purportedly kept the Complainant in a rented house at Tamluk, and got her son admitted in Tamralipta Public School, at his expense. The Appellant also regularly transferred money into the bank account of the Complainant for her day-to-day expenses and that of her son. It was allegedly on this pretext that the Appellant had physical relations with the Complainant on multiple occasions. It is alleged that the Appellant also took the Complainant/Respondent no. 2 to his residence in Kolkata, and had repeatedly assured her that he will marry her. However, when the divorce of the Respondent No.2/Complainant was finalized, the Appellant started avoiding her, stopped answering her phone calls and told her not to have any contact with him whatsoever.