LAWS(CAL)-2006-1-16

PURNENDUKUMAR SENGUPTA Vs. SANDIP BAGCHI ALIAS BHOLA

Decided On January 13, 2006
PURNENDU KUMAR SENGUPTA Appellant
V/S
SANDIP BAGCHI ALIAS BHOLA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The hearing stems from an application under section 401 read with section 482 Cr PC filed by the petitioner praying for revision of the order of acquittal passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Jalpaiguri in Sessions Case No. 119/2000 (S.T. No. 30/2000) under sections 498A/306 IPC on 30.04.2002.

(2.) The miniaturised version of the Prosecution is that the defacto complainant's daughter Kakali Sengupta was married with the present petitioner No. 1 Sandip @ Bhola Bagchi on 20.06.97. After a few months altercation and scuffle took place regularly between Sandip and his mother - petitioner No. 2 Dolly Bagchi over the issue of monetary and family expenses. Dolly Bagchi refused to accept the food prepared by Kakali and separated her son and daughter-in-law in a separate mess in the same house which was intimated by Kakali to her mother (P.W. 5) and aunt. Subsequently, on the request of Kakali's mother and aunt not to separate her son and daughter-in-law. Dolly Bagchi agreed. But after sometime dispute cropped up again when on being asked by Dolly Bagchi to leave the house. Sandip and Kakali, with the help of one Hari Dutta (P.W. 12). started residing as tenant in the house of one Shasthi Bose (P.W.2) at New Town. On 24.01.98 on receipt of an information over phone from the said Shasthi Bose that fire broke out in the house of Kakali, the defacto complainant and others rushed there and found Kakali was being removed in burnt condition to hospital. Later she was admitted in Mitra Nursing Home at Siliguri where she expired on 20.02.98 at about 9.30 p.m. After 3/4 days during visit of the said Hari Dutta and Shasthi Bose with their wives, they reported to the petitioner that the death of Kakali was not an accidental one but due to inhuman behaviour of Dolly Bagchi and hot temper of Sandip. It is apprehended by the defacto complainant that her daughter was abetted to commence suicide. Hence, both the accused were charged under section 498A/306 IPC.

(3.) The defence case is a plea of innocence and that the victim Kakali died accidentally by fire due to explosion of stove.