Shyamalesh Roy And ANR v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVSIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE The Hon'ble JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI CRR 2111 of 2022 Shyamalesh Roy & Anr.

-VsThe State of West Bengal & Anr.

For the Petitioner: Mr. Kishore Mukherjee, Adv., Mr. Sankha Subhra Ray, Adv.

For the State: Mr. Avishek Sinha, Adv. Heard on: 13th July, 2022 Judgment on: 13th July, 2022.

BIBEK CHAUDHURI, J. : - 1.

This is an application for expeditious disposal of GR Case No.2923 of 2018 arising out of Sinthi Police Station Case No.146 of 2018 dated 5th November, 2018 under Section 341/324/354/506/114 of the IPC presently pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah.

2.

On perusal of averment made in the instant revision and having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner this Court of the view that the instant revision can be disposed of here and now with the assistance of the learned Advocate for the state. Accordingly, Mr. Avishek Sinha learned Advocate is requested to assist this Court on behalf of the state. Appointment of Mr. Avishek Sinha learned advocate be regularized by the learned Legal Rememberancer, Government of West Bengal.

3.

It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioners that the opposite party no. 2 registered the present case on 5th November, 2018 against the petitioners to counter an earlier complaint made by the petitioner no. 1 on the same day. Charge-sheet was duly submitted on 30th November, 2018 but charges has not been framed till date. Further on 6th July, 2019 the opposite party no. 2 prayed time for filing narazi petition and on 26th September, 2019 the trial court granted time to file Narazi petition and next date was fixed on 30th December, 2019 but opposite party no. 2 did not appear as there was resolution for no adverse order. Thereafter 10 dates i.e. 12.2.2020, 22.6.2020, 10.9.2020, 11.12.2020, 11.03.2021, 18.06.2021, 06.09.2021, 09.12.2021,28.02.2022 and 20.05.2022 were duly passed for filing Narazi petition and adjournments were taken by the opposite party no. 2. 4.

Under such circumstances, petitioner have prayed for expeditious disposal of the case.

5.

Having heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned Advocate for the state it is found that till date charge has not been framed by the trial court. Therefore, question of any direction for expeditious disposal of the abovementioned case does not arise at this stage.

6.

The instant revision is accordingly dismissed. (Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)