A. K. DUTTA, J. ( 1 ) BY the instant revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner-accused, Saibal Banerjee, has prayed the Court for quashing all the proceedings arising out of Beliaghata Police Station Case No. 79 dated 5. 5. 92, registered as Case No. G. R. No. 983 of 1992 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Sealdah on the grounds set forth therein. ( 2 ) ON an F. I. R. being lodged by the informant Archana Bhattacharjee on 5. 5. 92 before the Officer-in-Charge, Beliaghata Police Station, on the allegations made therein the police had started the relevant case against the petitioner-accused under section 306, I. P. C. It is submitted that even though the aforesaid case has been so registered by the police, they are doing nothing in the matter, allowing the investigation to be kept pending for long to the prejudice of the petitioner-accused. ( 3 ) ALL that had been urged on behalf of the petitioner-accused during the hearing is that the aforesaid F. I. R. dated 5. 5. 92 by the said Smt. Atreyee Bhattacharjee, as it is, does not constitute the alleged offence for which the relevant proceedings is liable to be quashed. In order to consider the said submission the relevant F. I. R. is required to be looked into, which reads as follows :-"on 3. 5. 92, I along with my daughter Atreyee Bhattacharya alias Tutun (27 years) along with my eldest son and daughter-in-law came to my sister's flat from my village. This is day (5. 5. 92) at about 5 a. m. when I woke up I found my daughter in bathroom. After waiting few minutes, when she did not come out, I called my eldest son Abhik Bhattacharya alias Somi. My son suspected some problem since we did not hear any sound from inside the bathroom. My son forcefully opened the door in front of me by breaking the latch and found my daughter hanging by using a same from the swearing pipe. We immediately alerted all my family members and got her down. She was at once removed to N. R. S. Hospital where she was declared dead. My son forcefully opened the door in front of me by breaking the latch and found my daughter hanging by using a same from the swearing pipe. We immediately alerted all my family members and got her down. She was at once removed to N. R. S. Hospital where she was declared dead. In this connection I would like to state that about two years back a marriage negotiation for my daughter was being made with Siddhartha Banerjee alias Sity S/o. Sri Amal Banerjee of Gauhati, Assam. But Amal Banerjee and Debasis Banerjee, elder brothers of the boy, turned down the proposal inspire of showing initial interest. After few months we came to know from her attitude that the youngest brother of the boy named Saibal Banerjee altars Badsha S/o. Sri Amal Banerjee residing at 8, Ashutosh Shastri Road, Calcutta-10, had developed intimacy with her. We tried to stop that intimacy by persuation but could not mould her mind as my daughter was very convinced about the marriage with Saibal and told us that she got total assurance from Saibal that he will marry her. So, we thought that we could discuss the matter with Saibal and my daughter invited him to my sister's flat at P-57, C. I. T. Road, Calcutta-10 last night. But the boy did not turn after giving assurance and obviously it became clear to my daughter that the boy did not love. The deliberate avoiding tendency corerdly attitude with ditching tendering of the boy Saibal frustrated my daughter when she came to know that she has been cheated by the boy. I feel that was the sole cause of my daughter's committing suicide. As such, I hold the boy guilty of abetting my daughter for committing suicide". ( 4 ) SO, I request you to take legal action. " in order to consider as to whether the aforesaid allegations in the F. I. R. , such as they are, constitute the alleged offence punishable under section 306, I. P. C. , for which the petitioner-accused has been proceeded against, it is necessary to look at the section which reads as follows :-"if any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. " ( 5 ) BY the aforesaid relevant F. I. R. the petitioner-accused is alleged to have abetted the commission of suicide by the victim Atreyee Bhattacharya alias Tutun. The petitioner-accused, presumably is alleged to have abetted the commission of suicide by the aforesaid victim girl by intentionally aiding, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing in terms of section 107, I. P. C. But the aforesaid relevant F. I. R, as it is, appears to be conspicuous by its silence that the petitioner-accused bad intentionally aided 6y any act or illegal omission the commission of suicide by the aforesaid victim girl. There is not the merest and faintest whisper, not to speak of any allegation in the F. I. R. against the petitioner-accused to that effect. It would oddly appear therefrom that he had allegedly developed intimacy with her and she was convinced about her marriage with him. She had further told the informant that she got total assurance from the petitioner-accused that he would marry her. In order to discuss the matter with him, the said victim girl had invited him to their flat at C. I. T. Road, Calcutta-10, on the night of 4,5. 92. But the (petitioner-accused) did not turn up despite giving assurance, and it became clear to her (victim girl) that be did not love her. The deliberate avoiding tendency and cowardly attitude of the petitioner-accused had frustrated her when she came to know that she has been cheated by him. The informant accordingly felt that was the sole cause for her daughter's committing suicide. But the said allegations, as they are, do not suggest that the petitioner-accused had intentionally aided by any act or illegal omission the commission of suicide by her. That being so, I am at one with the submissions of the learned Advocate for the petitioner-accused that the F. I. R. , at it is, does not constitute the alleged offence against the petitioner-accused for which he is being proceeded against. The Supreme Court in the decision in Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia and Anr. v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and ors. The Supreme Court in the decision in Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Scindia and Anr. v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and ors. , AIR 1988 SC 709 , has clearly held that the legal position is well-settled that when a prosecution at the initial stage is asked to be quashed, the test to be applied by the Court is as to whether the uncontroverted allegations as made prima facie establish the offence. It is also for the Court to take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to continue. This is so on the basis that the Court cannot be utilised for any oblique purpose and where in the opinion of the Court chances of an ultimate conviction are bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, the Court may while taking into consideration the special facts of a case also quash the proceeding even though it may be at a preliminary stage. It would further be pertinent to recall that the Supreme Court in the decision in the State of U. P. v. R. K. Srivastava and ors. , AIR 1989 SC 2222 has clearly held that it is a well-settled principle of law that if the allegations made in the F. I. R. are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute an offence, the criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such F. I. R. should be quashed. Since the allegations made in the F. I. R. in the relevant case, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the alleged offence for which the petitioner-accused is being proceeded against the relevant proceedings is liable to be quashed. The Court could neither allow the relevant criminal prosecution to continue since the chances of ultimate conviction on the basis of the relevant F. I. R. we bleak and no useful purpose is likely to be served in allowing the same to continue. The relevant criminal proceedings is accordingly liable to he quashed. ( 6 ) THE revisional application accordingly succeeds. The relevant proceedings be quashed. ( 7 ) THE petitioner-accused be discharged from his bail bond, if on bail. Application succeeds.