NUDRAT AKHTER Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the revision applications are taken up together for disposal via this common judgement on account of identical issue involved in both the cases initially put into motion by Aneesha Asfer who is the common opposite party (O.P. No. 2) in both the revision applications. Brief facts:- CRR 372 of 2016

(2.) Petitioners no. 1, 2 and 6 are the sister-in-laws of the opposite party no. 2 herein. Petitioner no. 3 is the husband of petitioner no. 2 and petitioner no. 5 is the husband of petitioner no. 6. Petitioner no. 4 is the son of the uncle-in-law of the opposite party no. 2. The full blood brother of the petitioners no. 1,2 and 6 namely Afser Shamim married the opposite party no. 2 herein and started residing along with his mother Ishrat Akhter (petitioner no. 1 of CRR 388 of 2016). It has been alleged that since after marriage the opposite party no. 2 in collusion with her husband started torturing the said Ishrat Akhter (petitioner no. 1 of CRR 388 of 2016) in every possible manner both physically and mentally in order to acquire the ancestral property. Such torture reached its saturation point on 20/1/2013 when she was viciously assaulted by the opposite party no. 2 herein along with her husband which resulted in severe injuries to the mother (petitioner no. 1 of CRR 388 of 2016) of the petitioner 1,2 and 6 herein.

(3.) On receipt of such information by the local people, petitioner no. 2 herein reached there and took her mother to the hospital. After recovery the mother-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 made a complaint to the Beniapukur Police Station which resulted in initiation of Beniapukur Police Station case no. 28 of 2013 dtd. 24/1/2013 under Sec. 326/114 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC). After initiation of such case a mass petition was made by majority of the local people with a prayer for prolonged custody of the opposite party no. 2 and her husband as they were arrested by that time. After completion of investigation in connection with the aforementioned case charge sheet was submitted against the opposite party no. 2 and her husband.