Chittaranjan Jathi And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

24.09.2024 KC WPA 20993 of 2024 Chittaranjan Jathi & Anr.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Sk. J. Alam ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Pintu Karar Mr. Akashdeep Mukherjee Mr. Sahabuddin Laskar Mr. Sourav Roy ... for the respondent nos. 5 & 6.

Ms. Munmun Tewari Mr. Dwaipayan Sanyal ... for the State.

The petitioner lodged an complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Bantra Police Station in the district of Howrah alleging that the private respondents herein have damaged a portion of the boundary wall and destroyed the building materials and also destroyed the 'karkhana shed' and took away the valuable goods therefrom. It has been further stated in the said complaint that when the petitioners raised objection they were assaulted with iron rod and lathi. It has been further stated in the said complaint that private respondents are threatening the petitioner of dire consequences.

Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that in spite of the fact that the said complaint was lodged on sometimes in the month of April, 2024, no steps have been taken by the police authorities.

Learned advocate for the private respondents submits that the allegations made against the private respondents in the said complaint is totally false. He further submits that the record of right, which is annexed at pages 14 and 15, is a forged document.

Learned advocate for the private respondents further submits that they have lodged a complaint alleging that the record of rights is a forged document. It is open to the police authority to act on the basis of the said complaint in accordance with law.

Heard the learned advocate for the State.

It is not in dispute that in spite of the fact that the complaint was lodged sometimes in the month of April, 2024, the police authorities have not communicated their decision on such complaint to the petitioner. In view thereof, the Officer-in-Charge, Bantra Police Station being the fourth respondent is directed to consider the complaint lodged by the petitioner vide letter

dated April 2, 2024, which is annexed at page 16 of the writ petition and in the event the said respondent is of the opinion that the same discloses a cognizable offence, FIR is to be registered forthwith. If the said respondent decides against registration of the FIR, reasons therefor are to be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order along with a copy of the complaint dated April 2, 2024, which is annexed at pages 16-17 of the writ petition. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)