CRR 2210 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present: The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta CRR 2210 of 2007 SMT. SUNDARI SAHA & ORS. Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. For the Petitioners : Mr. Tapash Kumar Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Tanmay Chowdhury, Adv. For the State : Mr. Rajdeep Biswas, Adv. Mr. Ravi Ranjan Kumar, Adv. Heard on : 17.09.2026 Judgment on : 17.09.2026 Uploaded on : 18.09.2026 [IN COURT] Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.: - 1. The petitioners have filed the instant revisional application seeking quashing of the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 147 of 2007 arising out of Dhaniakhali Police Station Case No. 7 dated 03.02.2007 under Sections 420/406/326/307/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly, Sadar. CRR 2210 of 2007 2 2. During pendency of this case, Petitioner No. 1, Smt. Sundari Saha and Petitioner No. 3, Sri Tapan Saha @ Tapan Kumar Saha, expired; as such, their case got abated. 3. The facts of the case are that on 3rd February, 2007, the Police Officers of the Dhaniakhali Police Station received a direction passed by the learned Magistrate for registration of the F.I.R. to the effect that the complainant, Anil Saha, alleged, inter alia, that after his father expired, his cousin brother, namely, Sri Tapan Saha @ Tapan Kumar Saha and others registered a sale deed in their favour, forging the signature of the complainant’s father. The matter was reported to the Gram Panchayat, and ultimately an agreement was executed by and between the parties. The accused persons assured the complainant that the land in question would be returned. However, when they were asked to return the same on 10th December, 2006, they became furious and abused the complainant in filthy language. On being objected to, the accused Tapan Saha, aiming at the complainant, assaulted him mercilessly with a bamboo with a view to killing him. Due to such assault, the complainant sustained injury to his head and also to his back and fell down. The accused no. 3 also hit the complainant using a stick. The complainant was medically treated in the hospital, and the doctor declared that his lower back had been fractured. CRR 2210 of 2007 3 4. An FIR was registered being Dhaniakhali Police Station Case No. 7 dated 03.02.2007 under Sections 420/406/326/307/379/34 of the IPC against the accused persons, including the petitioners herein. 5. After culmination of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the petitioners under Sections 341/323/506/34 of the IPC, when a prima facie case was established against the accused persons. 6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the perfunctory investigation, the instant revisional application has been filed by the petitioners praying for relief as aforesaid. 7. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that there was a long-standing property dispute between the complainant and the accused persons. They are all close relatives. The matter is wholly civil in nature, but the complainant tried to colour it with criminality by lodging a false and frivolous complaint for their ulterior motive. The allegation of assault is only against Tapan Saha, who has already expired, and his case has been abated. The petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case, and they were not involved in any incident as alleged; as such, the whole case is an absolute abuse of process of law. 8. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners finally prays for quashing of the proceedings; otherwise, the petitioners would be highly prejudiced and suffered oppression. CRR 2210 of 2007 4 9. None appears on behalf of opposite party no. 2. The matter is pending since 2007. 10. Learned advocate representing the State produces the case diary and the memo of evidence. The memo of evidence, filed by the State in court today, is taken on record. 11. It is submitted on behalf of the State that there is sufficient material available against the present petitioners; a charge sheet has also been submitted against the present petitioners under Sections 341/323/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. He prays for dismissal of this revisional application so that the trial may be concluded to uncover the truth and punish the real culprits. 12. Having heard the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through materials available on record, including the memo of evidence and the case diary, this Court finds that the complainant made a specific allegation of assault by Tapan Saha, alleging that he assaulted the complainant at the time of the incident. However, the injury report does not substantiate the alleged injury sustained. 13. This Court has also gone through the statements recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as the medical documents, and is fully satisfied that sufficient material is not available against the present petitioners for commission of alleged offences. No CRR 2210 of 2007 5 specific role or participation is attributed to the petitioners herein. Even for the sake of argument, if this Court were to allow the proceedings against the petitioners to continue, then the chance of conviction is rare and bleak. Therefore, in exercise of the inherent power conferred on this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the proceedings against the petitioners is liable to be quashed to secure the ends of justice. 14. The scope of the Court's inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash criminal proceedings has been settled by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal1 wherein seven categories of cases are set out for the exercise of such power. On the facts of this case, this Court finds that it falls under the third category, where the allegations in the FIR, even if taken at face value, along with the evidence collected, do not show that any offence was committed by the accused. As noted above, the injury report does not support the allegation of assault, and neither the case diary nor the memo of evidence shows any specific role played by the petitioners in the alleged offences. Continuing the proceedings against them would therefore only amount to an abuse of the process of the Court, and the interest of justice requires that the proceedings be quashed as against the petitioners. 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 CRR 2210 of 2007 6 15. With the above observations, CRR 2210 of 2007 stands allowed. 16. Accordingly, the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 147 of 2007, arising out of Dhaniakhali Police Station Case No. 7 dated 03.02.2007 under Sections 420/406/326/307/379/34 of the IPC, now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly, Sadar, is hereby quashed insofar as the present petitioners are concerned. 17. Consequently, the connected applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 18. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated. 19. Let a copy of this judgment be communicated to the learned Trial Court for information and necessary steps. 20. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this judgment duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 21. The concerned Department is directed to supply urgent certified Photostat copy of this judgment to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) AN