Susmita Mahato v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

D/L27 06.05.2025 Rohit ct.no.35 WPA 8910 of 2025 Susmita Mahato

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, Sr. Adv Ms. Moumita Pandit Ms. Ritushree Banerjee Mr. Bhaskar Mondal ...for the Petitioner Ms. Sabnam De Bardhan Ms. Kakali Naskar ... for the State Mr. Debtanay Banerjee Ms. S. Roy Chowdhury ...for the respondent No. 6 Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be taken on record.

Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact of the manner in which money has been siphoned by duping the petitioner at the behest of the respondent no.5. Petitioner alleges that the respondent no. 6 introduced respondent no. 5 against whom several allegations have been made in the letter of complaint addressed to the police authorities and the application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C filed before the learned CJM, Alipore. Petitioner's further grievance is that although the order was passed by

the learned CJM, Alipore on 8th August, 2024 yet the Gariahat Police Station did not register the case. State has submitted a report. Report reflects that Gariahat Police Station Case No. 74 dated 24.04.2025 under Section 420/409/120B IPC has been registered for investigation against the respondent nos. 5 and 6. The reason assigned by the concerned police station is that the order-sheet dated 08.08.2025 was received by Memo No. 608 dated 24.04.2025 by the Gariahat Police Station.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that communication was made in respect of the orders so passed by the learned CJM, Alipore. However, in view of the fact that case has already been commenced and the petitioner's grievance is being addressed in respect of huge amount of money which the petitioner complained has been siphoned by way of misrepresentation and/or by misappropriating the amount which belonged to the petitioner and her family members I am of the view that the police authorities would put in efforts for exhausting the issues canvassed by the petitioner particularly with regard to the culpability attached and take the investigation of the case to its logical conclusion. Since the preliminary grievance of the petitioner has been addressed further pendency of the

writ petition at this stage is unwarranted. If the petitioner is subsequently aggrieved, petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court with further prayers.

With the aforesaid observations WPA No.

8910 of 2025 stands disposed of.

Report so submitted be kept with the record.

All parties shall act on the Server Copy of this order duly downloaded from the Official Website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)