Sefaur Rahman @ Sefaur Rahaman @ Sefarul Rahaman v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

01.12.2025 rc/ct.no.05 Item No.12 WPA No. 22322 of 2025 Sefaur Rahaman @ Sefaur Rahaman @ Sefarul Rahaman

Versus

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Prosenjit Mukherjee Mr. Saptarshi Chakraborty Mr. Arghya Kamal Das Ms. Tiyasa Ghosh Ms. Babita Pramanik ..for the Petitioner Mr. Pantu Deb Roy Mrs. Ashima Das Sil ....for the State Mr. Rajendra Banerjee Mr. Joy Chakraborty ...for the respondent nos. 11 and 12 Mr. S. Roy Chowdhury Mr. Souvik Ganguly ...for the respondent no. 13 Dr. Madhusudan Saha Ray ...for the WBSEDCL Report submitted by the State and the WBSEDCL are taken on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father and brother of the petitioner expired due to electrocution in a water logged field due to deliberate act of the private respondents. The private respondents left loose electrical wires from their submersible pump in the field deliberately which resulted in such electrocution. Despite such fact, the police registered the case under Section 106 of the BNS.

Learned counsel for the State submits that the incident was merely an accident and the private respondents had no role to play therein.

Learned counsel for the WBSEDCL submits that the distribution company supplied electricity to the 12th respondent and is not responsible for the outgoing terminals from the meter of the said respondent. However, the distribution company has disconnected the service connection of the said respondent for violation of safety norms.

Learned counsel for the 13th respondent submits that this respondent has no role to play in the present matter.

By an earlier order dated September 24, 2025 this Court recorded that since investigation was in progress, Case Diary be produced before this Court.

In the meantime charge sheet has been submitted. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved by the mode and manner of investigation and the offence recorded in the charge sheet, he is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate in accordance with law.

No fruitful purpose shall be served by keeping the writ petition pending. The same is accordingly disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

(Suvra Ghosh,J)