KALAWATI DEVI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revisional application has been preferred with a prayer for quashing of the first information report (FIR) being Uttarpara Police Station case no. 472 of 2019 dtd. 10/9/2019 under Sec. 498A/323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code being G.R. case no. 1746 of 2019.

(2.) The case set out by the defacto complainant in the F.I.R. is that on 10/9/2019 at about 8 A.M. in the morning, the petitioner started inflicting torture upon opposite party no. 2 and after receiving injury, she felt down on the ground. It is also alleged that at that time, the petitioner hold hair of the opposite party no. 2 and inflicted bodily injury by fist and blows and that petitioner no. 1 took a brick in order to assault her but at that time, the mother and sister of the defacto-complainant came to the spot along with local inhabitants and rescued the opposite party no. 2. It is further stated that marriage was solemnised between opposite party no. 2 and son of the petitioner no. 1 on 28/1/2005 and due to said wedlock, two sons were born. Unfortunately the husband of opposite party no. 2 who is the son of the petitioner no. 1, died in a road accident on 26/1/2016. It has been further alleged in F.I.R. that after the demise of her husband, her mother-in-law and her sister started inflicting torture upon her and for which she filed first information report as above.

(3.) However, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner no. 1 is solely dependent on her husband who is a permanent resident of Bihar and after demise of her son, she seldom came to West Bengal. On 10/9/2019, the petitioner no. 1 came to West Bengal to visit her grand children and daughter in law but when she about to enter into the house, the opposite party no. 2 got furious and hot altercation took place between petitioner no. 1 and opposite party no. 2 and she was beaten ruthlessly by the parents and brother of the opposite party no. 2, who are residing in the said house. The petitioner 's contention is that she never shared the same household with petitioner no. 1 as opposite party no 2 has been residing at West Bengal since inception of her marriage. It is evident from the first information report that the opposite party herself admitted that there was no torture or cruelty so long her husband was alive. The opposite party no. 2 never resided with the petitioner no. 1 after her marriage. Even if the entire prosecution story as stated in the first information report is taken as true from its face value, even then it does not constitute any offence under Sec. 498A. The complaint does not state specifically as to which accused has committed which offence and what is the exact role played by this petitioner in regard to the commission of offence.