Sujit Sinha v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

CRR 1534 of 2022 Court No.

Item 38 tbsr In the matter of:- Sujit Sinha 06.05.

Mr. Swapan Kumar Mallick Ms. Sudeshna Das Ms. Munmun Dubey .....for the petitioner Mr. Imran Ali Md. Kutub Uddin .....for the State Although this is an application for quashing of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Sections 498A, 323 and 504 of the Penal Code, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner would not like to press this application and would instead pray for an expeditious disposal of the proceeding.

On his prayer, the prayer for quashing is dismissed as not pressed.

Let a copy of this application be served Mr. Imran Ali and Md. Kutub Uddin, 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 the accused in this case. The FIR was lodged on 13.07.2017. A charge sheet was submitted on 30.08.2017. The prosecution proposes to be examined 8 witnesses in this case. The petitioner

surrendered and obtained bail in 2017. On 19.04.2018 charges were framed. Yet, till date only one witness could be examined. The proceeding has remained pending for no fault of the present petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State submits that no inordinate delay has been occasioned in this case. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition.

For an FIR that was lodged in 2017, charges have already been framed. In fact, one witness has been examined in this case. As such, I do not find that inordinate delay has been occasioned in this case.

However, it is expected the learned trial court would conclude the proceeding as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, preferably within a year from next date of hearing. The petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the points taken up before the learned trial court.

With these 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.)