- (1.) This revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Code) has been filed by the petitioner aiming at quashing of the investigation in connection with Dantan P.S. Case No. 67 dated 12.7.05 under Sections 363/365/366/484/465/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short I.PC.) corresponding to G. R. Case No. 976/05 now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipur at Midnapore Sadar.
(2.) Mr. Prabir Mitra learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that eldest son of petitioner No. 2 has been given in marriage with de facto complainant's daughter namely Samsurat Bibi. Petitioner No. 1 being another son of petitioner No. 2 developed intimacy with another daughter of de facto complainant Sk. Islauddin and name of the said daughter of de facto complainant is Samsunnar Khatoon.The petitioner No. 1 and the said daughter of de facto complainant were married without permission of the de facto complainant. The said marriage was not liked by the de facto complainant and on 4.5.05 he along with some others came to the house of petitioners and forcibly took away Samsunnar Bibi to unknown destination. Petitioner No. 1 filed a complaint against de facto complainant and others in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate at Dantan which was registered as Case No. C. R. 21/05. Petitioner No. 1 also prayed for search warrant under Section 97 of the Code praying for recovery of his wife Samsunnar Bibi. The learned Magistrate by his order dated 8.6.05 was pleased to take cognizance of offence on the basis of complaint and also issued search warrant for the recovery of wife of petitioner No. 1 and in pursuant to the said search warrant the wife of petitioner No. 1 was recovered from the house of de facto complainant. The de facto complainant Islauddin filed a complaint against the petitioners before the learned Judicial Magistrate. Dantan which was registered as Case No. C.R. 18/05 under Sections 361 / 363 of the I.P.C. and the learned Magistrate by order dated 4.5.05 has issued process against the petitioners. The de facto complainant filed second complaint before the same learned Magistrate at Dantan over self same fact on 27.6.05 which was registered as Case No. C.R. 27/05 under Sections 363/ 365/ 366/ 323/ 448/ 465/ 506/ 34 of the I.P.C. and the learned Magistrate by order dated 27.6.05 has been pleased to take cognizance and fixed a date for examination of complainant and his witnesses under Section 200 of the Code.
(3.) Mr. Mitra further submitted that the learned Magistrate by his order dated 4.5.05 rejected prayer of the de facto complainant in C.R. No. 18/05 for issue of search warrant for the recovery of his daughter. The de facto complainant was not satisfied even after filing two complaints against them and was determined to put them behind the bar. In order to fulfil his aim, the de facto complainant filed the third complaint and this time not before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dantan but, he filed the complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Paschim Medinipur at Midnapore and prayed for direction for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code and the learned CJM sent the said complaint to O.C., Dantan P.S. for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code treating the complaint as First Information Report (FIR). The third complaint filed by the de facto complainant giving rise to Dantan RS. Case No. 67 dated 12.7.05 (G.R. Case No. 976/05) is also on the basis of same factual matrix and same incident dated 2.5.05 concerning which the de facto complainant Sk. Islauddin filed two complaints earlier namely, C.R. No. 18/05 and C.R. No. 27/05. The learned Magistrate at Dantan has taken cognizance of offence over the two earlier complaints filed by the de facto complainant and issued process against them in one complaint and another complaint is pending for initial ejahar.;