Mahananda Biswas v. State Of West Bengal

NB 17.03.2022 CRR 815 of 2022 Ct. No. 39 In the matter of:- Mahananda Biswas ...petitioner Mr. Sumanta Das.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Anwar Hossain, Mr. Mirza Firoj Ahmed Begg.

....for the State.

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge was framed under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act.

Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Anwar Hossain and Mr. Mirza Firoj Ahmed Begg, learned Counsels who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. Let them represent the State. Their engagement may be regularised by the competent authority of the State in due course.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is an accused in this case. He is in custody since 06.01.2021, the date on which the FIR was registered. A charge sheet was submitted in May, 2021 and supplementary charge sheet was submitted in August, 2021. In all, prosecution intends to examine six witnesses in this case. On 22.11.2021, a charge was framed. Yet, till date not a single witness could be examined in this case. The matter has remained pending for no fault on the part of the present petitioner.

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

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition.

It appears that for an FIR which was registered in January, 2021, charge sheet and supplementary charge sheet were submitted by 2021 and a charge was also framed in November, 2021. Therefore, one cannot really say that there was an inordinate delay in proceeding with the case.

However, it is also a fact that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 06.01.2021.

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the learned Court is requested to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, preferably within a period of one year from the next date of hearing.

With the above observations, 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.)