Abdul Mannan Mondal v. State
23.5.2025 Sl.11 Nandita Court No.655 CRA 266 of 2000 In the matter of : Abdul Mannan Mondal ....Appellant Mr. Avisekh Sinha ...For the State
1. None appears on behalf of the appellant/complainant.
2. In pursuance of the direction passed by this Court an explanation is submitted by the Superintendent of Police, North 24 Parganas along with a report submitted by Basirhat P.S. Basirhat Police District. The said report indicates that during pendency of this appeal the appellant/complainant was expired on 30.07.2002.
3. It appears from the said report that the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 7 were also expired during the pendency of this appeal and the respondent no. 11 has been missing since twenty years. The rest of the respondents were intimated about the direction of this Court by the concerned police station.
4. The instant appeal is preferred at the behest of the appellant/complainant challenging the impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated March 31, 2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Additional Court at Basirhat, DistrictNorth 24 Parganas in connection C. Case No. 788 of 1991 under sections 147/149/379/352 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. The appellant/complainant has been expired during pendency of this appeal.
6. I have gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the Trial Court and find there is nothing to interfere with it. 7.Accordingly, the instant appeal assailed by the appellant/complainant being CRA 266 of 2000 is hereby dismissed on merit.
8. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Trial Court dated March 31, 2000 is hereby affirmed.
9. Let the report submitted by the Superintendent of Police and the report submitted by the Basirhat P.S. be kept with the record.
10. Let a copy of this order along with the Trial Court Records be sent down to the Trial Court immediately.
11. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Prasenjit Biswas, J.)