← Library
Calcutta High CourtWPA(H)/6/2025disposed

Pintu Bej v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

2025-01-27Hon'Ble Justice Arijit Banerjee,Hon'Ble Justice Apurba Sinha Ray3 pages

27.01.2025 Item No.1089 Court No.29.

S. De WPA (H) 6 of 2025 Pintu Bej.

Vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sourav Mondal, Mr. Rony Mondal, Mr. Arijit Bhuiya, Mr. Abhirup Halder, ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Rana Mukherjee, Ld. APP, Mr. Simanta Kabir, ...for the State.

Order dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.

1. The petitioner filed this writ petition praying for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus alleging that on December 23, 2024, his wife went missing.

2. The State files a report today. Let the same be kept with the records.

3. The relevant portion of the report reads as follows : "Based on the missing diary lodged, Sankrail Police Station conducted an enquiry, during which Suparna Bej was traced and located. Upon being found, Suparna Bej provided a written statement (copy enclosed) dated 18.01.2024, clarifying that :

(a) She had voluntarily left with one Rabi Das due to their mutual affection and was residing with him as his wife.

(b) She was not abducted or taken away forcefully.

(c) She had no complaints against anyone and chose to stay with Rabi Das of her own will.

This refers Mohanpur Police Station GDE No. - 731 dated 17.01.2025 and Dhulagarh Out Post (under Sankrail PS) GDE No.-387 dt 18.01.25.

The petitioner's allegations of inaction are unfounded, as Sankrail Police Station promptly investigated the matter and traced the missing person. The written statement of Suparna Bej, provided under her own volition, establishes that no crime occurred and refutes the claims made by the petitioner.

Last of all this is to mention here that the police have acted diligently in this matter, locating the missing person and recording her voluntary statement. The petitioner's grievances stem from personal matters rather than procedural lapses by the police. The statement of the missing person was video-graphed also. However, the under-signed is duty

bound to abide by all the orders of the Hon'ble High Court, Calcutta in this connection."

4. Annexure to the report is a letter dated 18.01.2024 (which is an obvious mistake and should be read as 18.01.2025) addressed by the so-called missing wife of the petitioner to the concerned police officer wherein she says that she left her matrimonial home on her own volition to live with her paramour as husband and wife.

5. In view of the aforesaid, it cannot be said that the petitioner's wife is missing any more.

6. We see no reason to keep this writ petition pending.

7. WPA (H) 6 of 2025 is, accordingly, disposed of. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)