24.07.2026 Sl. No.12. D/L. Mithun. Ct.No.29. CRR/1724/2025 Anirban Rakshit Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Ayan Bhattacherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Pratip Mukherjee, Mr. Biplab Majumder …for the petitioner Mr. Rajdeep Biswas, Mr. Ravi Ranjan Kumar …for the State Affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. In spite of service, private opposite party /de facto complainant is not represented. Petitioner has prayed for quashment of the proceeding being Haridevpur Police Station Case No.176 of 2021 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, presently pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid proceeding, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the de facto complainant married the petitioner on 11.12.2019. It is alleged in the written complaint that the de facto complainant was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by her husband and her in-laws who also took away all her gold ornaments. It is further alleged that her husband and her in- laws pressurized the father of the opposite party no.2 for buying a luxurious four wheeler car for the petitioner and upon protest the same, she was subjected to mental and physical torture. It is her further case that she was driven out from her matrimonial home on 2 14.03.2021. After completion of investigation police submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and the in-laws under the above-mentioned sections. Being aggrieved by the said proceeding, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bhattacherjee submits that the allegations are absolutely false and frivolous and it would be evident from the statement of the witnesses and the investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer that there is no material to fabricate the present petitioner herein with the offences alleged in the complaint. The allegation also has not been supported by any medical document. He further submits that the other accused persons, namely, the in-laws of the de facto complainant made a prayer before this High Court for quashment of the said proceeding, qua, the petitioners being CRR 2474 of 2024 where this High Court by an order dated 15.01.2025 was pleased to quash the said proceeding, qua the petitioners, with the observation that the allegation made against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been attributed to any of the petitioners in connection with the offences alleged and the charge-sheet also reiterates the case as made out in the complaint and nothing further. This Court has further held that the details of evidence/materials collected in course of investigation to substantiate the allegations are absent in the charge-sheet and the charge-sheet is bereft of any incriminating material against the petitioner to constitute offences alleged and, therefore, the proceeding should be quashed, qua the petitioner. 3 Mr. Bhattacherjee further submits that the present petitioner is almost on the same footing with that of the petitioners of CRR 2474 of 2024 and, therefore, continuance of proceeding any further against the present petitioner would also be mere abuse of process of the Court and, therefore, is liable to be quashed. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State placed the Case Diary and leaves the prayer made by the petitioner to the discretion of the Court. I have considered submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and the State and I have also gone through the materials available in the Case Diary including the statements recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. It appears that the allegation against the petitioner/husband is omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been substantiated during investigation against the petitioner. Moreover, the materials collected during investigation hardly constitute offence under Section 498A or 406 of the IPC against him and, therefore, conviction of the present petitioner is bleak even if the proceeding is allowed to continue. Therefore, a façade trial will only amount to wastage of Court’s valuable hour. In view of above, I find that this is a fit case where the proceeding is liable to be quashed invoking this Court’s inherent jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice. CRR 1724 of 2025 is allowed. The impugned proceeding being Haridevpur Police Station Case No.176 of 2021 dated 06.08.2021 under Sections 4 498A/406/34 IPC read with Sections 3 /4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act presently pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore corresponding to ACGR Case No.132 of 2023 is hereby quashed, qua the petitioner, Anirban Rakshit. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. ( Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. )