NILANJAN MITRA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application seeking addition of appropriate penal provision in the array of allegations, transfer of investigation and departmental action against the errant police/officers.

(2.) Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the de facto complainant and the uncle of the victim deceased. Although, the death of the victim took place beyond seven years of marriage, yet only Sec. 304B along with Sec. 498A of the Penal Code were imputed in the FIR registered. No charge under Sec. 302 was added. This is a case of gruesome murder where the assailant husband showed on video call to a relative of the deceased how the victim was burning. This is clearly a case of murder. Neither was the mobile phone seized nor were relevant witnesses examined. Even the wearing apparels were not seized. The broken door was also not seized. The investigation done was absolutely perfunctory. The accused was also arrested only after the anticipatory bail prayer was rejected by this Court. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and submits as follows. Statements of witnesses have been recorded. The phone in question could not be seized because, as the accused had explained, he could not remember where he had kept the same. Upon instruction from the Investigating Officer present in Court, it is strongly submitted that there is no material to add Sec. 302 of the Penal Code. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and have perused the case diary.

(3.) First, it is quite apparent that Sec. 304 B of the Penal Code has no manner of application in this case as the incident happened after 7 years of marriage. The recording officer wrongly added this provision to the FIR and the Investigating Officer, blissfully ignorant of the provisions of law, carried on investigation under such provision.