SK SALAUDDIN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the Code) has been preferred by the petitioners praying for quashing the criminal proceeding, being C.G.R. Case No. 3816 of 2000 under sections 498A/406/313/120B of IPC now pending in the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (hereinafter called the SDJM), Alipore.

(2.) Petitioners' contention is that, the opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint in the Court of learned SDJM, Alipore making allegation of persistent torture, ill-treatment on her demanding dowry against the petitioners. The said complaint was sent to O.C., Ekbalpur P.S. for investigation treating the complaint as FIR under section 156(3) of the Code and on the basis of it Ekbalpore P.S. case No. 255 dated 15.11.2000 was started against the petitioners under sections 498A/406/313/307/120B of IPC. After completing investigation the police submitted charge sheet against these seven petitioners under sections 498A/406/313/120B of IPC and the learned SDJM received the charge sheet on 7.4.02. Long before that by a letter dated 11.9.01 written by the de facto complainant O.P. No. 2 wife addressed to O.C., Ekbalpur P.S. accompanied by a copy of affidavit affirmed by her before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Alipore on 10.09.01, it was stated by her that she does not like to proceed with the instant case against the accused persons for the welfare of her peaceful conjugal life as she was staying with her husband since last more than two months. In spite of that letter written by the de facto complainant wife addressed to O.C., Ekbalpur P.S. the police submitted the charge sheet.

(3.) Referring to the decisions of B.S. Joshi and Swati Verma's case reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and (2004)1 SCC 123 learned advocate for the petitioners contended that when the wife has written letter addressed to O.C., Ekbalpur P.S. that she does not like to proceed further with the case started on the basis of her complainant, the investigating Office (hereinafter called the I.O.) should have considered the matter and should not have submitted charge sheet. The Supreme Court has clearly observed that it is the duty of Court to encourage genuine settlement of matrimonial disputes. The hyper technical view would go against interests of women and against the object in which the provision was added. The Supreme Court has made it clear that in a situation like the present one where the husband and wife have come to amicable settlement the High Court should exercise inherent powers to quash the criminal proceeding.