High Court Of ChhattisgarhCRMP/1960/2018disposed off

Ranjan Kumar Panda v. The Station House Officer

2018-09-20Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant3 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 1960 of 2018

1. Ranjan Kumar Panda S/o Shri Gaur Hari Panda Aged About 63 Years Sub Inspector, R/o 3-E, Old Kolkota Road, Barakpur, (M), Talpukurnorth 24 Pargana, West Bangal District North Twenty Four Parganas, West Bengal, District : Pargana, West Bengal

2. Tapas Das S/o Shri Vishwanath Das Aged About 48 Years Sub Inspector, R/o Bibadhayee Mannapara, Dattapukur, West Bangal District North Twenty Four Parganas, West Bengal, District : Pargana, West Bengal

3. Nitish Kumar Mandal S/o Shri Naba Kumar Mandal Aged About 38 Years C604, R/o Jatiyadaha, Faridpur, Mursidabad, West Bangal District Murshidabad, West Bengal, District : Murshidabad, West Bengal

4. Shankar Sanfoyee S/o Shri Semotul Sanfoyee Aged About 42 Years Constable, C-736, R/o Saratapalli, Dighipur, South 24 Paragana, West Bangal District North Twenty Four Parganas, West Bengal, District : Pargana, West Bengal

5. Jagdiash Mandal S/o Shri Siddheshwar Mandal Aged About 37 Years Constable, C62, R/o Village And Post Boriya, Police Station Diamond Harbour Bariya, South 24 Pargana, West Bangal District North Twenty Four Parganas, West Bengal, District : Pargana, West Bengal ---- Petitioners

Versus

• The Station House Officer Through Police Station Grp Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioners :

Shri N.K. Mehta, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Shri Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board

20/09/2018 Heard.

1. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been brought for modification in the order passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.(A) No.997/2018 dated 7.9.2018.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, that in the description given in cause title of the order, the name of applicant No.2 has been wrongly mentioned, which should have been Tapas Das instead of Tapan Das. Similarly a typographical mistake has been committed in mentioning the name of applicant No.4 as Shankar Sonfoyee which should have been Sankar Sanfoyee. It is prayed that order may be modified accordingly.

3. Learned counsel for the State has no objection, if, the order is rectified accordingly.

4. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record.

5. Perused the record of M.Cr.C.(A) No.997 of 2018, it appears that a typographical mistake has been committed in mentioning the names of Applicant Nos.2 & 4. On the basis of the correct names that are mentioned in the cause title of the application and on the cause title of the order passed by the Court below, the petition is allowed. It is ordered that the name of name of applicant No.2 shall be read as Tapas Das instead of Tapan Das and similarly the name of applicant No.4 shall be read as Shankar Sanfoyee instead of Shankar Sonfoyee hearinafter. A copy of this order shall be attached with the original file of bail application.

6. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed off.

7. Certified copy today.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) JUDGE Nisha