Sunil Kumar Roy Chowdhury And ANR v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

24.02.2022 SB Ct. No.39 CRR 536 of 2022 In the matter of : Sunil Kumar Roy Chowdhury & Anr. Mr. Rajkrishna Mondal ... for the petitioners This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a revisional application being Criminal Revision No. 127 of 2018 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Barasat, North 24 Parganas. Let a copy of the revisional application be served upon Mr. Imran Ali and Ms. Manisha Sharma learned counsels who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. They are requested to appear in this matter. Their engagement may be regularised by the competent authority of the State in due course.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are the parents-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 / de facto complainant. The petitioners who were acquitted in a case inter alia under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code started by the opposite party no. 2 against this. The opposite party no. 2 preferred a revision in 2018 against this. There was some delay in preferring the revisional application as well. However, the matter remained pending. This Court, by an order dated 23.12.2021 passed in CRR 2573 of 2021, directed an expeditious disposal of the proceeding. In fact, on the last date before the Trial Court i.e. on 16.12.2021 the next date was fixed on 28.07.2022. But, such next date was not preponed.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that the question of delay has already been taken into consideration by this Court

in the earlier revisional application. Therefore, no further order can be passed in this case.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the State and have perused the revision petition.

It appears that by an order dated 23.12.2021 passed in CRR 2573 of 2021 this Court directed expeditious disposal of the proceeding. However, the next date fixed before the learned Trial Court was not preponed.

Therefore, this Court cannot sit in review over the earlier order passed as regards preponment of such date.

There is already a direction for an expeditious disposal of the proceeding. Therefore, no further order need be passed in this revisional application.

Accordingly, the revisional application is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)