Sk Hossen@Bablu v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

19.03.2021 sb Ct23

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE (Via Video Conference) WPA 3168 of 2021 Sk. Hossen @ Bablu Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Shamit Sanyal, Ms. Priyakshi Banerjee, ... For the petitioner.

Mr. Samrat Sen, Ms. Sutapa Sanyal ... For the State.

Affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record.

The petitioner complains of police inaction in the instant writ petition. It appears from the record that the police authorities have registered an FIR on 27th December, 2020, in terms of the petitioner's complaint.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that a charge sheet, pursuant to completion of investigation in terms of the FIR registered upon the petitioner's complaint being lodged has been filed with the jurisdictional Magistrate as against Ajmira Begum, the respondent no.5.

The petitioner it at all aggrieved by any act of the police authorities as to the investigation has to now redress his grievances before the jurisdictional

Magistrate who is in seisin of the criminal case. Considering this aspect I do not find any scope of passing an order in the writ petition as prayed for.

The writ petition is disposed of by giving the petitioner liberty to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate, before whom the criminal case is pending, if so advised, on the self-same grounds as stated in the writ petition.

Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in the writ petition and the same is accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.

Since I have not called for any affidavits, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have not been admitted by the respondents.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the parties upon compliance with the necessary formalities.

(Arindam Mukherjee, J.)