TIRTHA SANKAR DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revisional application has been preferred for quashing of the proceeding of GR case no. 2806 of 2018 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 2nd Court at Howrah and the charge-sheet filed therein vide no. 67 of 2018 dtd. 28/7/2018 under Sec. 498A/342/323/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code arising out of Santragachi Police Station case no. 49 of 2018 dtd. 27/5/2018 under Sec. 498A/342/323/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and the daughter of opposite party no. 2 was solemnised on 26/11/2009 and the marriage was duly registered. Thereafter, they were living happy conjugal life at the house of the petitioners but subsequently, some disputes and differences cropped up. The daughter of opposite party no. 2 left her matrimonial home with her minor children and started to reside at her paternal house at Panskura, Medinipore. On May 27, 2018 opposite party no. 2 lodged a written complaint at Santragachi Police Station which was registered as Santragachi Police Station case no. 49 of 2018 under Sec. 498A/342/323/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After perfunctory investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer being charge-sheet no. 67 of 2018 dtd. 18/7/2018 under Sec. 498A/342/323/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide his order dtd. 11/2/2009 had taken cognizance. During pendency of the aforesaid criminal proceeding, the parties have settled their disputes amicably and presently they are residing together with their minor children at Santragachi. The daughter of opposite party no. 2/ defacto complainant has already affirmed an affidavit stating that they have settled the said dispute. In view of the aforesaid settlement and in view of the fact that the marital knot of the petitioner no. 1 and daughter of opposite party no. 2 has been saved from being broken, due to amicable settlement, arrived at by and between the parties, the continuance of the instant proceeding under Sec. 498A/342/323/506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code would be nothing but abuse of the process of law and the same is required to be quashed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of their contention relied upon the Apex court judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi and ors., Vs. State of Haryana and anr., (2003) 4 SCC 675.