The Calcutta High Court has stepped in to end a criminal case involving serious allegations of dowry harassment and attempted murder, ruling that continuing the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the legal process. The court quashed the case after finding that two complaints were filed over the same incident and that the records lacked concrete supporting evidence.
The order was passed by Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das while hearing a criminal revision petition filed by the husband and his family members.
Read also:- Supreme Court Transfers Matrimonial Case from Chennai to Kalyan Citing Wife's Hardship
Background of the Case
The case arose from a long personal relationship that eventually turned into a legal battle. According to court records, the complainant and the main accused were in a relationship for about 12 years before marrying in a temple in February 2021.
In March 2022, the woman alleged that she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by her husband and in-laws. The accusations included assault, an attempt to burn her with kerosene, illegal confinement, threats, and demands for dowry. Based on these claims, a police case was registered at Dhantala Police Station in Nadia district.
However, the court noted that an earlier FIR had already been lodged at Sagar Police Station in South 24 Parganas concerning the same alleged incident dated March 18, 2022. Despite this, a second complaint was filed through a court application under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, leading to another case and a charge sheet.
The accused family members approached the High Court seeking quashing of the second case.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Rejects Lapse Claim in 1960s Land Acquisition, Says Compensation Was Properly Deposited
Arguments Before the Court
Counsel for the petitioners argued that filing two criminal cases over the same incident was not legally sustainable. They contended that the allegations were vague, general in nature, and appeared to be an afterthought driven by personal animosity.
“The entire family has been dragged into litigation without specific roles being attributed to each accused,” the petitioners’ lawyer submitted during the hearing.
On the other hand, the complainant’s counsel opposed the plea, stating that the allegations reflected continued cruelty and that the charge sheet showed sufficient grounds for trial.
The state prosecution acknowledged that two cases existed against the same accused persons but suggested that both matters could be tried together instead of being quashed.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Rejects Lapse Claim in 1960s Land Acquisition, Says Compensation Was Properly Deposited
Court’s Observations
After examining the case diary and records, the High Court found several inconsistencies and gaps. The bench observed that both complaints referred to the same alleged incident but were filed at different places without any clear explanation.
“The subsequent complaint is completely silent about the earlier FIR,” the court noted, adding that such suppression of facts raised serious doubts about the complainant’s version.
The judge also pointed out that the allegations of extreme violence, including an attempt to burn the complainant, were not supported by medical or independent evidence in the case diary. There was also inconsistency regarding the allegation of forced abortion, with different versions appearing at different stages.
Referring to Supreme Court rulings on misuse of criminal law in matrimonial disputes, the bench observed, “Courts must be extremely careful while dealing with cases where all family members are implicated on broad and omnibus allegations.”
Decision
Concluding that allowing the case to proceed would result in misuse of the criminal justice system, the High Court allowed the revision petition.
“This court does not find any sufficient material to permit the proceedings to continue further,” the judge held, adding that it would otherwise be “an absolute abuse of the process of law.”
Accordingly, the criminal proceedings pending before the magistrate’s court at Ranaghat were quashed, and the case diary was ordered to be returned.
Case Title: Asish Bera & Others vs State of West Bengal & Another
Case No.: CRR 476 of 2023
Decision Date: 30 January 2026
