SMT. SIBANI DUTTA Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND KINKAR NATH DUTTA (DE FACTO COMPLAINANT) (AIDED WITH THE LEAVE OF THE COURT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, widow of late Sasanka Sekhar Dutta, is an accused in a case registered by her husband's brother Kinkar Nath Dutta being Tarakeswer P.S., Case No. 12 dated 24.1.1985 under sections 493/365/420/120-B/109 of the Indian Penal Code. She admittedly left her husband's house along with some gold ornaments which according to the statements of her brother-in-law, weigh about 50 bhoris. There was also an allegation that she has taken away Rs. 7,000.00 with her. The allegation clearly implicated her with illicit relationship with one Rabin Manna, a compounder who used to attend her ailing husband for several years past for giving him injection. It was alleged that on 23rd Jan., 1985 the petitioner's sister-in-law found her missing from their family home and on search it was discovered that she has left behind an empty ornament box on her bed and she left with 50 bhoris of gold ornaments and Rs. 7000.00 with her. Police took up investigation and arrested the said Rabin Manna and one Provakar Chakraborty. They were initially arrested at Gaya where several gold ornaments were seized from the petitioner's possession. No test identification parade was held in respect of the seized gold ornaments. However, police submitted a charge-sheet against the petitioner, the said Rabin Manna, one Provakar Chakraborty and one Krishna Murari Pathak under sections 380/406/411/109 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) It is the contention of the petitioner that she left her deceased husband's residence of her own along with her gold ornaments and cash money and she was no way connected with any offence.

(3.) She contends further that at the time of lodging the First Information Report, her brother-in-law did not disclose the particulars of the gold ornaments, as a result whereof the gold ornaments recovered were also not placed for any test identification parade. He claims the gold ornaments to be her own to which neither her son nor her daughter has any interest. She also denies that any of the ornaments belonged to her husband's brothers wife or any other relation on the side of her husband. She claims the ornaments as her stridhan property which was given to her by her father and other relatives at the time of her marriage ceremony.