Chand @ Pappu @ Chand Mahammad v. State

23.08.2021 Item no.9 Ct. No.34 CHC C.R.R. No.684 of 2012 (Physical Hearing) In Re: An application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

AND In the matter of:- Chand @ Pappu @ Chand Mohammad ... petitioner Mr. Kallol Mondal, Mr. Krishan Roy, Ms. Amrita Chel ....for the petitioner Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. Suman De ...for the State The revisional application was preferred at a stage when the chargesheet was filed before the jurisdictional court and the evidence of the witnesses was yet to be recorded. Earlier, on 17.08.2021, a report was received from the concerned officer and handed over to the Court by the learned advocate appearing for the State which reflects that already five witnesses have been examined and the case is at the midst of trial. Having regard to the same, I am of the view that no interference is called for at this stage. However, the petitioner

would be at liberty to agitate points canvassed in the revisional application at the stage of final argument of the case. With the aforesaid observations, the revisional application being C.R.R.684 of 2012 is disposed of.

Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of. Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

All parties shall act in terms of copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)