Bulan Das v. State Of West Bengal

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Debangsu Basak Bulan Das Vs.

The State of West Bengal For the Petitioner : Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Advocate Ms. Sadia Parveen, Advocate For the State : Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. PP Ms. Rituparna De Ghosh, Advocate Ms. Suparna Chatterjee, Advocate Hearing & Judgment on : September 10, 2025 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- 1.

Status report filed in Court be kept on record. 2.

IA No. CRAN 1 of 2025 is an application for condonation of delay. 3.

For the ends of justice, the explanation offered is accepted as sufficient.

4.

Delay is condoned.

5.

IA No.: CRAN 1 of 2025 is allowed.

6.

Revisional application is directed against Order No.67 dated January 18, 2024 passed in Special Trial Case No.62 of 2021.

7.

By the impugned order, learned Judge refused to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner.

8.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the police filed charge sheet. Petitioner is not an accused in the criminal case. The bank account of the petitioner, therefore, cannot be kept frozen indefinitely.

9.

Learned Advocate appearing for the State refers to the materials in the case diary. She submits that, the police case involves a sum in excess of Rs.18 crores which, the accused, took away by practising fraud of various account holders.

10.

Learned Advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the fact that a sum of Rs.1 lakh was deposited in the bank account of the petitioner. Petitioner explained that such amount was received from one Goutam as her professional fees. However, in the Test Identification Parade, the petitioner failed to identify Goutam. She also points out that, money from that bank account went to at least three different persons. She submits that, the investigations are yet to be concluded finally.

11.

Possibility of the account being used for the purpose of laundering money which the accused collected by defrauding bank account holders cannot be overlooked at this stage.

12.

There remains the possibility of the bank account to be used as a mechanism to commit fraud and the bank account proceeds also used for to proceed of the crime.

13.

In such circumstances, I find no material irregularity in the order impugned.

14.

In such circumstances, I find no merit in the present application. 15.

CRR 1654 of 2025 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (AD)