The High Court of Calcutta, while allowing a petition filed under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the CrPC, 1973 seeking quashing of the Charge under Sections 417/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioner/accused, held that there could not be any question of promise to marry given by the petitioner to her at that stage.
Brief Facts:
The opposite party herein lodged a complaint against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner induced the opposite party no. 2 to believe that he would marry her after securing a job and based on such assurance, petitioner from time to time cohabited with the opposite party no. 2 at different places. A case under Sections 417/376 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioner.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the allegation, leveled by the married lady, does not disclose the ingredients of the alleged offenses. She has falsely implicated the petitioner though she knows very well that she is a mature married lady and the issue of inducing her to cohabitate on the pretext of a false promise of marriage is patently false and inherently in-probable. As such, the charge sheet and proceeding thereof are patently an abuse of process of law, and to secure the end of justice, the case deserves to be quashed at the threshold.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent submitted that a prima facie case has been established against the present petitioner after investigation by the investigating officer and a charge sheet has been submitted against the present petitioner under Sections 417/376 of the IPC. The learned Court below, after considering the materials available in the CD, took cognizance and framed charges against the petitioner.
Observations of the court:
The court noted that the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 had developed intimacy and later turned to physical relations at different places at different times.
The Court observed that no dissolution of marriage was declared till the date of complaint. When her earlier marriage subsists, how a lady can marry another person is a big question. There could not be any question of promise to marry given by the petitioner to her at that stage. She was mature and capable enough to understand the consequences of the moral and immoral acts for which she consented during the subsistence of her earlier marriage.
The decision of the Court:
The Calcutta High Court, allowing the petition, held that this Court does not find any sufficient materials against the present petitioner.
Case Title: Bhabatosh Biswas v The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta
Case No.: C.R.R. 553 of 2017
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. S.M. Obaidullah
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Asraf Mondal and Ms. Faria Hossain
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
