Shuvra Sekhar Roy v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

C.R.R. 765 of 2021 Court No.

Item 151 ssi 15.03.

In the matter of:- Shuvra Sekhar Roy Ms. Susnigdho Bhattacharyya ...for the petitioner Mr. Arijit Ganguly Mr. M.F.A. Begg ...for the State This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 323, 354, 427 and 448 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Let a copy of the application be served upon Mr. Arijit Ganguly and Mr. M.F.A. Begg, learned advocates, 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 was one of the three accused in this case. Although the two other accused had been absenting themselves by taking turns, at present one of the accused has passed away and there is an order of proclamation and attachment passed against the other. The present petitioner is the only

accused who is presently appearing before the Court on a regular basis. Although the First Information Report was lodged in 2013 and the charge-sheet was submitted in 2014, till date, even charges could not be framed. The proceeding has remained pending largely for no fault of the present petitioner. In the interest of justice, the proceeding may be split up as against the petitioner and disposed of expeditiously.

Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that whoever may be responsible for the delay, as the matter is pending since long, the same ought to be expedited.

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 to any one, if a direction is passed for expediting the proceeding.

It appears that an inordinate delay was occasioned in the impugned proceeding.

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I request the learned trial Court to conclude the proceeding 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. The learned trial Court shall be at liberty to split up the proceeding as against the present petitioner and

proceed expeditiously.

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.)