Indranil Choudhury @ Indranil Chowdhury v. State Of West Bengal & ANR

D/L27 March 22, Bpg.

CRR No.2566 of 2019 In Re: An application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;

Indranil Choudhury @ Indranil Chowdhury

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Mr. Apurba Kumar Dutta, Mr. Debanjan Mukherjee, Mr. Avished Bhandari.

...for the petitioner.

Ms. Anasuya Sinha, Mr. Pinak Kr. Mitra.

...for the State.

Mr. Samiran Mandal, Mr. Abhinaba Dan, Mr. Nitish Samanta.

...for the opposite party no.2.

Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.

The present petitioner before this Court happens to be the husband of the de facto complainant/opposite party no.2, who was arrayed in connection with Taldangra Police Station Case No.29 of 2019 dated 10.03.2019 under Sections 498A/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Mr. Dutta, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, because of matrimonial discord and mental mismatch, the petitioner has been asked to face ordeal of trial and with ulterior motive the criminal case has been instituted at the

instance of the opposite party no.2. Learned advocate additionally submits that there are no specific allegations against the present petitioner for which the petitioner is to face trial. Learned advocate for the opposite party no.2 resists the submission advanced by the petitioner and submits that within a short period of time physical and mental torture was inflicted in such a manner that the opposite party no.2 had to leave her matrimonial home.

Ms. Sinha, learned advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and draws the attention of this Court to the statements of the different witnesses.

I have perused the materials on record particularly the statements of the witnesses in relation to the allegations appearing against the present petitioner and on perusal of the same, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for interference by this Court. Accordingly, CRR 2566 of 2019 is dismissed.

Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of. Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

As the incident complained of is of the year 2019, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the progress of the trial and take it to its logical conclusion within a period of two years from the date of communication of this order.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)