Subhasis Dasgupta, J. - (1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of a criminal proceeding being FIR No. 4 of 2018 dated 16.02.2018, Chandrapur Police Station under Sections 498A/493/417/307/323/506/354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code now pending before the Court of ACJM Suri, Birbhum.
(2.) Learned advocate for the revisionist/husband sought for quashing of the proceeding referred hereinabove alleging that the instant criminal proceeding, initiated by the de facto complainant/opposite party No.2/wife, was nothing but a counter blast of civil suit being Title Suit No. 7 of 2018, filed by revisionist/husband against opposite party No.2/wife praying for declaration that the alleged marriage, said to be held on 05.04.2016 under Special Marriage Act 1954 between the parties, as null and void. The revisionist having denied the alleged marriage, instituted the aforesaid civil suit, which is pending for adjudication. According to petitioner, the opposite party No.2 admittedly received summons of the pending suit, and thereafter initiated the instant proceeding implicating revisionist and his family members with some cooked up materials, and if such proceeding was not allowed to be quashed, it was proposed, that it would be a glaring instance of perversity. The ingredients fell sort of the offence, complained of, in the in the instant proceeding, and accordingly it was submitted by the revisionist, that the instant proceeding should be quashed being wholly unsanctioned by law. The instant proceeding, according to revisionist, was purposive, vexatious and mala fide as well, which if allowed to be continued, would lead to abuse the process of the Court.
(3.) Learned advocate for the opposite party No.2 submitted that police had already submitted chargesheet against the accused persons making out a prima facie after collection of sufficient materials therefor, and when the chargesheet had already been submitted, it would be not wise to allow the quashing, as proposed by the revisionist. Thus, according to opposite party/ de facto complainant, the revisionist/husband being a civic volunteer, engaged by the police administration of the district concerned, developed of love affairs with the de facto complainant/opposite party No.2, and co-habitated with her a good number of times promising her to marry subsequently giving due recognition therefor. Since there was some problem faced by the revisionist/husband, the marriage between the parties was held under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, and accordingly a marriage certificate was issued thereunder. At the time of marriage held under the provision of the Special Marriage Act, the parents of the de facto complainant gave Rs.2,75,000/- together with other valuables as per demand of the revisionist and his family members, but the parents of de facto complainant failed to satisfy further demand of Rs.5,00,000/- as further dowry together with other valuable items, when it was given to understand that de facto complainant would not be accepted as duly weded wife of petitioner giving her due recognition, unless the further demanded amount was liquidated.;