Manash Pratim Bora v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

Form J(1) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present :

The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri CRR 3709 of 2022 Manash Pratim Bora Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Mr. Dibakar Sardar ...for the petitioner Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, Ld. APP Ms. Sonali Das Ms. Sreeparna Das ..for the State Item No. 07.

Heard & Judgment on:

03.01.2023 Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the investigational process in connection with Jadavpur Police Station Case No.349 of 2020 dated 12th November, 2020 under

Sections 120B/406/420/506/467/468/469/471 of the Indian Penal Code. Vide order dated 15th November, 2022 this Court narrated the factual background leading to the filing of the instant revision. However, at the risk of repetition it is recorded that the de facto complainant lodged a complaint on 10th November, 2020 stating, inter alia, that sometimes in the year 2017 he met one Mr. Bhashkar Chakraborty and present petitioner regarding admission of his daughter in Lady Harden Medical College or Mahavir Vardhan Medical College in Delhi. They assured him that her admission will be confirmed in the management quota provided he would pay a sum of Rs.70 lakhs. In all he paid Rs.52 lakhs and Rs. 50 thousand to the bank account of Bhashkar Chakraborty maintained at Guwahati.

Thereafter he was told that a seat had been arranged for his daughter at Mahavir Vardhan Medical College, Delhi. He went there with his daughter and found that no seat had been allocated to his daughter as stated by the accused persons. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner only introduced the de facto complainant with Bhashkar Chakraborty.

account of Bhashkar Chakraborty. The petitioner is in no way connected with the said transaction or the issue. As per direction dated 15th November, 2022 Mr. Nandy, learned P.P.-in-charge has produced the case diary. It is ascertained from the case diary that both the petitioners run horticulture business under the name and style of Horticon Sales Corporation. Bank account of Horticon Sales Corporation is maintained by both the petitioner and Bhashkar Chakraborty. Amount of money that was paid by the de facto complainant was deposited in the bank account of Horticon. From the said account the present petitioner withdrew considerable amount of money and also transferred huge amount of money in the bank account of his wife. The case diary further reveals Whatsapp conversation between the present petitioner and the de facto complainant regarding admission of the daughter of the de facto complainant in a medical college. Thus, considering the extent of complicity of the petitioner I do not find any merit in the instant revision.

Accordingly, the instant revision is summarily dismissed. The case diary be returned.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)