DALIM KUMAR DAS Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 401 of the said Code filed by petitioner Dalim Kumar Das for setting aside the order dated 29.01.2014, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kandi, Murshidabad in S.SL. No. 62/2013 arising out of Kandi Police Station Case No. 576/11 dated 03.11.2011 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (G.R. 1596/11), rejecting petitioner's prayer for discharge from the case.

(2.) However, the petitioner may take out an application under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for his discharge from the case in the learned Trial Court". Being influenced by such observation the petitioner filed an application in the Trial Court under Sections 227/228/239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for his discharge from the case but passing the impugned order learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected that application with observations that an FIR was lodged by the father of deceased girl who was aged about 17 years and was a maid servant of the petitioner who became conceived and disclosed before the informant that this petitioner cohabited with her resulting her pregnancy. Further observation of the learned Trial Judge is that the FIR goes to suggest the allegation and aspersion against this accused (petitioner herein) makes out a strong prima facie case against the petitioner and the matter was also investigated and charge-sheet has been submitted against him under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. Considering said aspects and finding materials in CD and record learned Judge in the Trial Court satisfied that there is material against the accused (petitioner) to frame charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) At the time of hearing learned Advocate for the petitioner has argued that the Post Mortem report of the deceased does not confirm her pregnancy and as such all allegations brought against the petitioner should have been considered as false in the Trial Court. Considering the said submission and considering the series of allegations brought against this petitioner and considering the fact that the case in the Trial Court is based on facts and circumstances this Court is of the opinion that without recording evidence in full trial it will not be proper to let the accused petitioner free. That apart, in this case this Court cannot play the role of a fact-finding Court. I do not find any illegal or improper or incorrect finding in the impugned order to set aside the impugned order. As a result, the impugned order is left without interference and this application is dismissed.