← Library
Calcutta High CourtCRR/2423/2025disposed

M/S Bharat Hi Tech (Cement) Private Limited v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

2025-09-17Hon'Ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay2 pages

Form J(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present :

The Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay C.R.R. 2423 of 2025 M/s. Bharat Hi Tech (Cement) Private Limited Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

For the petitioner :

Mr. Atis Kumar Biswas, Mr. Amit Singh, Mr. Rahul Soni Heard on : 17.09.2025 Judgment On :

17.09.2025 Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The report placed by the Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta in connection with G.R. Case No.1177 of 2010 through the learned Registrar(Judicial Service), High Court at Calcutta be kept on record.

2. It appeared from the report that one petition under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. filed on 02.07.2016 had been pending for disposal and the next date of hearing of the said petition had been fixed on 15.10.2025. The G.R. case was registered on the basis of an

FIR being No.188 dated 02.04.2010. 15 years have lapsed till date and the charge could not be framed. The learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta is to take stringent and necessary steps for framing of charge and completion of the trial within one year from the date of passing of this order.

3. The report filed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta is contrary to the order-sheet annexed with the instant revisional application which stated the petitioner under Sections 239 of the Cr.P.C. to have been filed on 22nd January, 2025 and the next date was fixed on 1st February, 2025 for hearing the petition under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. and framing of charge. Subsequently on 3rd January, 2025, 22nd January, 2025, 1st February, 2025, 4th March, 2025 the learned Trial Court had granted adjournment without taking stringent action against the accused persons for their absences preventing the Court to frame charges. The attitude on the part of both the parties cannot be accepted

4. The criminal revision is accordingly disposed of. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.) Mithun De A.R. (Court)