The Calcutta High Court on 18th March 2021 disposed of the revisional application by quashing the police case against the petitioner on strictly observing that a plausible explanation was mandatory for the delay in lodging complaint.
The Petitioner (wife) was the Secretary, Department of Self Help Group and Self Employment, Government of West Bengal, who sought to quash the FIR in Alipore Police Station and the impugned order dated 28th March 2019 of Chief Judicial Magistrate for registering a police case after treating the same under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as an FIR against the Petitioner.
The opposite party no. 2 (husband) was alleged to be in a bigamous relation with another lady who committed torture upon the Petitioner & her daughter of 6 months for which the Petitioner lodged a case. Also, it was argued that the documents placed before the inquiry authority in the departmental proceeding against the opposite party no. 2 were accepted and marked in presence of the opposite party no. 2 without any ire which were then alleged to be forged or illegally procured documents by the Petitioner. Further, the FIR registered at a belated stage was alleged to be an outcome of counterblast against the two cases pending trial against the opposite party no.2.
The Petitioner argued that there was a manifest, malafide, absurd, and improbable allegation made in the FIR as they didn’t confirm any offense committed by the Petitioner far less the offenses alleged by quoting Sections of various Acts.
Also, the learned Magistrate treated the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. as an FIR without an inquiry under Section 202 of the said Code. Moreover, the documents alleged to be forged were handed over to the petitioner by the opposite party no. 2 itself while staying together, and thus, they were protected by Section 122 of the Evidence Act, and the proceeding itself was barred as in total violation of Section 195 (1) (a) (i) (b) (i) of Cr.P.C.
The opposite party no. 2 pleaded that the Petitioner’s revisional application was premature and tantamount to an abuse of Court’s extraordinary powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for it seeks quashing of criminal proceedings without any justification/explanation/legal basis whatsoever. Further, it was contended that during an investigation, the FIR cannot be throttled & quashed.
It was also argued that the petition under Section 156(3) was supported by an affidavit of the De-Facto Complainant as an oath before the Learned Criminal Court, thus, it didn’t mean that s. 154(3) of the Code had not complied with it as the same wasn’t attached to the s. 156(3) application.
The Hon’ble Justice Shivakant Prasad observed that the opposite party no. 2 initiated the proceeding maliciously with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance on the petitioner due to some private and personal grudge. Further, the application under Section 156(3) via 28.03.2019 treated as an FIR was not in compliance with Section 154(1) and 154(3) of Cr.P.C. It was ruled that the chagrined and frustrated litigants should not be allowed to give vent to their frustrations by cheaply abusing the process of the Criminal Court. Also, the alleged FIR lodged without any explanation for the delay was undoubtedly barred by Section 468 Cr.P.C. The Court thus held that on a conjoint reading of the averments made in the application under Section 156(3) with the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, Indian Telegraph Act, and the Information Technology Act, against the petitioner were falsely alleged.
The Hon’ble Court allowed the instant CRR 1323 of 2019 and quashed the proceeding against the petitioner of Alipore Police Station.
Click here to view full judgment.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.