LexTUHIN KUMAR BISWAS @ BUMBA versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 12 S.C.R. 258 : 2025 INSC 1373 Tuhin Kumar Biswas @ Bumba v. The State of West Bengal (Criminal Appeal No. 5146 of 2025) 02 December 2025 [Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh and Manmohan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration The Revision Petition filed by the Appellant-accused against the order dismissing the discharge application filed by the Appellant in FIR No.50/2020 dated 19.03.2020 lodged with police station Bidhannagar North, was dismissed by the High Court. Whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the Appellant- accused for the offences alleged in the FIR. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.341, 354C, 506 – The complainant, an alleged tenant of A, one of the co-owners of the property filed a complaint/FIR u/ss.341, 354C, 506 of IPC – It was alleged that when the complainant along with her friend and workmen tried to enter the property, the Appellant-accused intimidated them and restrained them from entering the property – The complainant further alleged that the Appellant-accused intimidated the complainant by clicking her pictures and making her videos on his mobile without her consent and by doing so, he intruded upon her privacy and outraged her modesty – Chargesheet was filed – Application for discharge filed by the accused was dismissed by the Trial Court – Revision Petition against the order of the Trial Court was dismissed by the High Court – Correctness: Held: At the stage of discharge, a strong suspicion suffices – However, a strong suspicion must be found on some material which can be translated into evidence at the stage of trial – FIR and chargesheet do not disclose an offence u/s.354C of IPC – Upon a perusal of the FIR and chargesheet on record, this Court is unable to conclude an offence u/s.354C of the IPC since there is no allegation in the FIR and chargesheet that the complainant * Author [2025] 12 S.C.R. 259 Tuhin Kumar Biswas @ Bumba v. The State of West Bengal was watched or captured by the appellant-accused while she was engaging in a ‘private act’ – Further, ingredients of criminal intimidation are not attracted – Except for the bald allegation that the Appellant-accused intimidated the complainant by clicking her photographs, the FIR and chargesheet are completely silent about the manner in which the complainant was threatened with any injury to her person or her property – Also, offence of wrongful restraint is not made out – In the present case, the right of the complainant to enter the property stems from the virtue of being a purported tenant of A – However, no material has been placed on record along with the chargesheet which indicates that the complainant was a tenant in the property at any point of time – In fact, the induction of the complainant as tenant in the property would have been in violation of the injunction passed by the Trial Court – This Court is of the opinion that all that the Appellant-accused did was to enforce what he bonafidely thought was his lawful right over the property in terms of the injunction order passed by the Trial Court – Consequently, this Court is of the view that criminal proceedings against the Appellant-accused for offences punishable u/ss.341, 354C, 506 of IPC cannot be permitted to continue. [Paras 17, 19, 20, 22, 25-27] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Chargesheets – Framing of charges – Tendency of filing chargesheets and framing charges in matters where no strong suspicion is made out clogs the Judicial system: Held: This Court would like to emphasise that where there is a pending civil dispute between the parties, the Police and the Criminal Courts must be circumspect in filing a chargesheet and framing charges respectively – In a society governed by rule of law, the decision to file a chargesheet should be based on the Investigating Officer’s determination of whether the evidence collected provides a reasonable prospect of conviction – The Police at the stage of filing of Chargesheet and the Criminal Court at the stage of framing of Charge must act as initial filters ensuring that only cases with a strong suspicion should proceed to the formal trial stage to maintain the efficiency and integrity of the judicial system – The tendency of filing chargesheets in matters where no strong suspicion is made out clogs the judicial system – It forces Judges, court staff, and prosecutors to spend time on trials that are likely to result in an acquittal – This diverts limi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.