Ashok Dutta@ Ashok Datta v. State Of West Bengal

Sl. 26 09.3.2022 Court No.39 SD CRR 726 of 2022 (Via Video Conference) In the matter of: Sri Ashok Dutta ... Petitioner.

Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury ... for the Petitioner.

Mr. Anwar Hossain Ms. Debjani Sahu ... for the State.

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Sections 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Anwar Hossain and Ms. Debjani Sahu, learned counsels, who are present in Court today and who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. Their engagement may be regularised in due course by the competent authority of the State. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is an accused in this case. Although the FIR was lodged way back in 2009, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. Only a few witnesses have been examined. There are seven witnesses to be examined in this case. For the last few years, the matter is pending for examination of witnesses 5, 6 and 7. The proceeding has remained pending not for the fault of the present petitioner. Earlier a direction was passed by this court for expeditious disposal of the proceeding by an order dated December 15, 2014 passed in CRR 3742 of 2014 and an order dated March 30, 2016 passed in CRR 1091 of 2016.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that State would not come in the way if a direction is passed to expedite the trial.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition. No prejudice will be caused if direction is passed in respect of the petitioner's prayer for expeditious disposal of the proceeding. It appears that an inordinate delay has been occasioned in this case, especially since FIR was lodged a long time ago in the year 2009. It is unfortunate that despite successive directions passed by this Court, the proceeding could not be concluded till date. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the learned trial court is requested to conclude the proceeding as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties and by fixing dates in terms of Section 309 of the Code, preferably within a period of eight months from next date of hearing.

With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)