‘Our daughters won Cricket World Cup, equality still distant’: Calcutta High Court restores trial against in-laws

Justice Apurba Sinha Ray noted that the in-laws of the victim were anxious about the gender of her expected child. (Image is enhanced using AI)

“We are happy and indeed rejoicing that our daughters have won the World Cup in Cricket recently, and they are also making remarkable achievements in different fields, sectors etc., the passing away of…..at the age of one and half years reminds us that still we have to go a long way to achieve complete equality for our girl children,” the Calcutta High Court observed.

‘Until last damsel in distress is free’

• The trial court failed to consider the statements of the vital witnesses, namely, the relatives of the victim, who stated that when the victim returned to her parental home in Punjab, she was subjected to torture at the hands of her in-laws.
• The statements of the relatives also disclosed that soon after the victim’s marriage, the husband and his family demanded an additional amount of Rs 5 lakh from her father if a girl child was born.

• It was also revealed that, allegedly, the in-laws of the victim were anxious about the gender of her expected child.
• When a girl child was born to the victim, this allegedly enhanced the magnitude of torture inflicted upon her.
• The case reminds one of the celebrated proverbial passage quoted by Justice Krishna Iyer – ‘No society is free until the last damsel in distress is free’.
• The cruelty cannot be defined in a straitjacket formula or with chosen words.
• The discharged accused persons are directed to appear and surrender before the trial court within four weeks.
• The trial court is directed to take the accused persons into custody and release them on bail upon furnishing bail bonds.
• The trial court is further directed to take appropriate steps for framing charges against the accused persons under the proper sections of law.

‘How cruel a mother can be’

• Representing the in-laws of the victim, senior advocate Deep Chaim Kabir argued that initially, the FIR was lodged by one neighbour, and that the accused persons were not present at the place of occurrence at the relevant time.
• Kabir also emphasised that the whole incident, in which the victim died and also killed her daughter immediately after a serious altercation with her husband, reflects “how cruel a mother can be”.
• He also emphasised that there was only normal matrimonial wear and tear between the victim and her in-laws, and nothing more than that.
• Kabir also mentioned that the victim had an allegedly suspicious nature and she suspected her husband if he had word with any woman in his circle.
• He also mentioned that the victim was suspicious about the relationship between her husband and his own aunt.
• Kabir pointed out that most of these allegations are against the husband of the victim and not against the in-laws.
• It was submitted that there was no dowry demand from the side of the in-laws, and they were not even present at the place where the altercations and disturbances were allegedly going on between the couple.
• He also mentioned the remarks of a police official concerned, where it was noted that the victim’s husband took the trouble to take the bodies of her wife and child to Punjab for the last rites and rituals.
• He stated that this signifies that although there was some normal matrimonial wear and tear between the victim and her in-laws, including her husband, it should not be considered in any other manner.

 Dicharge

• Appearing for the state, advocate Sumit Kumar Karmakar emphasised that statements of several witnesses showed that there was sufficient material against all the discharged accused persons.
• Karmakar further highlighted that the victim was subjected to physical and mental cruelty, which ultimately led to the tragic incident involving both the mother and her infant daughter.

• He further submitted that the trial court did not consider the statements of witnesses with due care and attention, despite the presence of prima facie material warranting trial against the discharged accused persons.

Marriage, island, altercation

• The victim got married to her husband in 2018 and started staying in Andaman and Nicobar Islands in a rented place in May, 2018. They had a one and half year old girl child who was also living with them.
• It was also placed on record that the other accused person, the in-laws of the victim, were not living with her at that time.
• The victim lost her life along with her daughter in 2021, following an altercation with her husband.
• Subsequently, the victim’s father filed a complaint alleging cruelty and dowry demands against his son-in-law and his family members.
• The trial court observed that there was insufficient material to frame charges against the in-laws, holding that only the husband could be charged, and accordingly discharged the in-laws in 2024.