Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rup Timir Baran Biswas vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 3 July, 2025
Item 03.07. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
No. 2025 CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
03 APPELLATE SIDE
Ct 32 CRR 4993 of 2024
rup Timir Baran Biswas
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. Anirban Dutta,
Mr. Abhra Jena,
Ms. Shiba Das
Mr. Yonus Khan
Mr. Swarnadeep Kanyilal ... for the petitioner.
Mr. Saibal Bapuli,
Mrs. Debjani Sahu. ... for the State.
1.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as
well as State are present.
2. One report has been submitted by the State showing the
intimation to the opposite party No.2. Let it be kept with
the record.
3. None appears on behalf of the opposite party No.2.
4. This revisional application has been filed with a prayer
for quashing the proceeding in connection with G.R.
Case No. 2987 of 2019 corresponding to Baguiati Police
Station Case No. 384 of 2019 dated 02.10.2019 under
Sections 420/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. The application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal
Procedure Code [corresponding to 175(3) of BNSS] was
filed on 02.10.2019. The matter was forwarded to the
jurisdictional police station wherein case was registered
2
as Baguiati Police Station Case No. 384 of 2019 dated
02.10.2019 under Sections 420/406/34 of the Indian
Penal Code. However, after investigation chargesheet
was submitted under Sections 420 & 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
6. The complaint was lodged contending, inter alia, that the
petitioners entered into an agreement with the promoter
for construction of flats in place of their old house. Upon
receipt of such information on 02.09.2019, the de facto
complaint/opposite party No.2 went to the house of the
petitioners and inquired about the illegal act of the
petitioners, but the de facto complaint/opposite party
No.2 was then abused and threatened with dire
consequences. On the next date i.e. 03.09.2019 at about
6.30 PM, petitioners came to the house of complainant,
hurled abuses and threatened him with dire
consequences. Also one purported photocopy of the Will
with probate was thrown at the complainant. From that
document it was found that mother-in-law executed a
Will in favour of her daughter Rita Biswas on 26th April,
1989. Complainant alleged that the said deed is forged
just to deprive the complainant.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has drawn my attention to the document, wherefrom it is
shown that one Misc. Case being No. 261 of 2019 was
filed by the complainant/opposite party No.2 with a
3
prayer for revocation of alleged probate and subsequently
the said complaint/opposite party No.2 herein filed one
application under Order 23 Rule 1 read with Section 151
of the Code of Civil Procedure stating, inter alia, that
entire dispute between the parties had already been
patched up and he subsequently realised that testatrix
voluntarily executed the Will which has already been
probated by the Learned Court of District Judge,
Barasat. Accordingly, complainant/opposite party No.2
expressed his wiliness not to proceed with the instant
case (Misc. Case No. 261/2019). Accordingly, learned
Judge allowed the application and the Misc. Case being
No. 261/2019 was dismissed as withdrawn.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relying
on the statement recorded of witnesses under Section
161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (180 of BNSS) has
submitted that the application under Order 23 Rule 1 of
the Code of Civil Procedure was filed long after filing of
the chargesheet. He raised objection against the prayer
advanced on behalf of the petitioner.
9. In this case chargesheet was filed under Sections 420/34
of the Indian Penal Code against two accused and it is
reported that out of the two accused one accused Prabir
Kumar Biswas died and the other accused is the
petitioner of this revisional application.
10. To constitute an offence under Section 420 of the
4
Indian Penal Code, the following ingredients have to be
satisfied:
(i) the deception of any person,
(ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing that
person to deliver any property to any person,
and
(iii) mens rea or dishonest intention of the
accused at the time of making the
inducement. There is no gainsaid that for the
offence of cheating, fraudulent and dishonest
intention must exist from the inception when
the promise or representation was made.
11. Here, in this case during investigation no effort was
made for ascertaining the credibility of the Will or
probate alleged by the complainant. On the other hand,
complainant himself filed an application for revocation of
that probate which was registered as Misc. Case being
No. 261/2019 and subsequently on 24th August, 2022
the petitioner/opposite party no.2 filed an application
under Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure
stating, inter alia, that dispute between the parties with
regard to the Will has already been patched up and he
realised that actually the testatrix executed the Will and
probate was rightly granted and therefore, he showed his
inclination to withdraw the proceeding being Misc. Case
No. 261/2019. Learned Judge dealing with the case
5
passed an order thereby dismissing the Misc. Case being
No. 261/2019 after accepting the statements made in the
application under Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil
Procedure.
12. In the aforesaid view of the matter, I do not find any
reason at this stage to allow the proceeding to continue
any further as it would be a glaring example of abuse of
process of Court.
13. That apart, the allegation made in the complaint has
not at all been substantiated by any of the evidence
collected during investigation.
14. As a sequel, the proceeding in connection with G.R.
Case No. 2987 of 2019 corresponding to Baguiati Police
Station Case No. 384 of 2019 dated 02.10.2019 stands
quashed.
15. Accordingly, the revisional application stands allowed.
16. All connected applications, if any, also stand disposed
of.
17. Case Diary be returned to the learned counsel on
behalf of the state.
18. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied
for, be given to the parties on usual undertakings.
19. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order
duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
6