17.07.2026 Serial no. 15 [Srimanta] Ct. No. - 29 CRR 86 of 2025 TARIFUL PEYADA & ORS. -VS- STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. Mr. Sourav Mondal, Mr. Arijit Bhuiya, Mr. Rony Mondal, Mr. Debarghyo Sil, Advocates … … For the Petitioners. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. The opposite parties are not represented in spite of service of notice. 3. In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashment of the entire proceeding in connection with complaint (A.C.) Case No. 214/2022 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act presently pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, 7th Court, Alipore, South 24-Parganas. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid proceeding, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2 got married on 10.09.2018 according to Muslim rites and customs. Thereafter on 16.03.2021 the opposite party no. 2 without the consent of the petitioners went to her parental home along with her streedhan articles. Though the petitioners on several 2 occasions had tried and requested the opposite party no. 2 to return to the matrimonial home but the opposite party no. 2 refused to do so and, thereafter, has lodged the instant complaint with a mala fide intention. 5. It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the opposite party no. 2 has initiated the aforesaid proceeding under Section 12 of the Act of 2005 against the petitioners only to harass them. The petitioners received a reply to the Right to Information Act, 2005 from the office of Block Medical Officer of Health vide letter dated 10.05.2024, from which the petitioners came to know that the opposite party no. 2 has already got married with someone, namely, Habibur Molla and the opposite party no. 2 is carrying at present. It is further submitted that the opposite party herein also earlier married one Moksed Sk. and said marriage was dissolved by way of a khulla talaknama on 8th August, 2014. 6. In the above background, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that it is evident that the opposite party no. 2 has already married someone and is also carrying and, therefore, the instant application under Section 12 which has been filed only to harass and humiliate the petitioners is not sustainable in the eye of law. 7. Having considered submissions made on behalf of petitioners it appears that in spite of receipt of the copy of 3 application as well as the notice, the opposite party has not come before the Court to controvert the petitioners’ specific allegation that she has already got married with someone, namely, Habibuddin Molla and that she is presently carrying due to said marital tie. Relying upon such unchallenged statements made on behalf of the petitioners, I find that further continuance of the said proceeding under Section 12 of the Act of 2005, which basically pertains to granting of monetary relief and for recovery of Streedhan articles, would be mere abuse of the process of the Court. 8. In view of above, CRR/86/2025 is allowed. 9. The proceeding being Complaint (A.C.) Case No. 214/2022 under Section 12 of the said Act of 2005 presently pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, 7th Court, Alipore is hereby quashed. (Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)