Decided on April 19,1983

Ajit Banerjee Respondents


B.C.CHAKRABORTI, J. - (1.) ON the complaint of the appellant a case being Case No. 13 of 1966 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Purulia, was started against the accused respondent Ajit Banerjee alias Ajit Kumar Banerjee and several others under Sections 494/109 of the I.P.C. After the prosecution witnesses were examined in Chief, the learned Magistrate framed charge under Section 494 I.P.C. against the accused respondent and discharged the other accused persons.
(2.) THE case of the complainant appellant, in brief, is as follows: - The complainant and the accused opposite party respondent were married in Baisakh, 1361 B. S. Thereafter she lived with the accused respondent at her father -in -law's place for about 21/2 years and a daughter was born to her. Subsequently, she was driven out of her father -in -law's house on the failure of the mother of the complainant to give some more landed properties by way of dowry. It is also her case that the accused used to visit the complainant while she was staying with her mother up to Baisakh, 1372 B. S. Thereafter, the accused respondent contacted a second marriage with one Manorama, daughter of puma Chandra Chatterjee of Garh Jaipur in the district of Purulia. It is further her case that the accused respondent has been living with the said Manorama and a child has been born unto them. The defence is one of complete denial of the prosecution case. In fact the accused appears to have denied even the marriage with the complainant appellant.
(3.) FIVE witnesses were examined for the prosecution, including the complainant herself. Besides the oral evidence, some documentary evidence in the shape of a letter written by the father -in -law of the complainant to her mother (Exhibit 1), a letter written by the accused opposite party respondent to the complainant herself (Exhibit 2) and three money order coupons (Exhibit 3 series) in the writting of the accused opposite party showing occasional remittance of money by the respondent to the complainant have also been proved. Of the five witnesses, P. W. 1 is the complainant herself, P. Ws. 2 and 3 sperk mainly, about the marriage between the complainant and the accused respondent, P. Ws. 4 and 5 are witnesses to the second marriage.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.