TANIA HALDER Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three (3) revisional applications, referred above, with a prayer for quashing each of pending proceedings, were heard together, on the prayer of the parties, on the ground that three such cases came to be filed, following a matrimonial dispute between a married couple namely Smt. Tania Halder (Mukherjee) and her husband Sourav Halder, which was admittedly held on 8th August, 2014.

(2.) The revisional application covered in CRR No. 869 of 2018 is relatable to a complaint case No. 50 of 2016, instituted by husband/complainant, Sourav Halder, arraying his wife with six others as accused persons therein, with an allegation of having committed offence, punishable under Sections 325/ 327/ 448/ 379/ 384/ 419/ 497/ 506/ 34 of Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned Magistrate, Barrackpore by his order dated 24th May 2016, after examination of witnesses under Section 200 Cr. P. C., proceeded to issue process against the accused persons named in the complaint under Sections 379/384/323/497/506/34 of Indian Penal Code. The gist of the allegations raised in the complaint is that Smt. Tania Halder (Mukherjee) soon after marriage developed a habit of leaving her matrimonial home without giving any information to her in law's members including her husband, and ultimately preferred to live apart, leaving permanently her matrimonial home. A matrimonial suit being No. 789 of 2015 then came to be registered at the instance of wife against her husband, which is now pending before the learned Additional District Judge, 3rd Court at Barasat. That on 9th February, 2016, when the matrimonial suit was fixed for hearing at the Barasat Court, the wife outside the court room purposefully threatened the complaint/husband with dire consequence, usuing abusive languages after having understood the participation of complainant/husband in the matrimonial proceedings. On the same day, at about 3.30 P.M., the accused/wife being accompanied by her close associates, who are also made co-accused persons, forcibly entered the house of complainant/husband, ransacked his house and finally left the house committed theft of golden ornaments and other valuable securities from the house of the complaint/husband. The wife/accused again appeared in the house of the complainant/husband on 11th February, 2016 and threatened for his alleged purposive participation in the matrimonial suit with dire consequence, after informing that she had then been carrying four (4) months old pregnancy, which was brought about to her by person, other than the complainant/husband.