Manoj Kumar Prasad v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

D/L.39.

October 7, 2024.

MNS.

WPA No. 22538 of 2024 Manoj Kumar Prasad Vs.

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Debasish Banerjee, Mr. Subrata Saha, Mr. Rakesh Jana, Mr. A. Biswas ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashim Kumar Ganguly ...for the State.

The petitioner alleges that no effective steps have been taken by the police authorities excepting registration of an FIR pursuant to the complaint lodged by the petitioner.

From the report of the Officer-in-Charge of Bhatpara Police Station dated September 18, 2024, it appears that after registration of the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer started the investigation. He visited the place of occurrence and recorded statements of the other witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said report further states that the Investigating Officer issued a notice to the petitioner under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for providing documents pursuant to the ownership of the property-indispute. Such notice was received by Sujata

Prasad, who is the wife of the complainant, but no steps have been taken by the petitioner to comply with the said notice.

The learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall comply with the said notice within a period of two weeks from date.

Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the State.

In the event, the petitioner complies with the notice under Section 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the concerned Investigating Officer shall take steps for concluding the investigation expeditiously and to take all consequential steps thereupon.

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.

Photostat certified copy, if applied for, be given to the parties.

(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)