Arundhuti Roy Chowdhury v. Union Of India And ORS.

27.02.2025.

d.p.

In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side W.P.A 30518 of 2024 Arundhuti Roy Chowdhury -versus The Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee, Mr. Debapriya Majumder.

...For the Petitioner.

Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, AGP Mr. Biman Halder.

...For the State.

Mr. Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee, Ms. Debjani Ghosh.

...For the Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5.

Mr. Saptansu Basu, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Prabal Kumar Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Debanik Banerjee, Mr. Steven S. Biswas, Mr. Huzaifa Shahid.

...For the Respondent No.5.

1.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits, upon instructions, that the writ petition has become infructuous.

2.

Prayer has been made to dismiss the matter as „infructuous‟.

3.

In view of such submission, the writ petition stands dismissed as "infructuous".

4.

The name of the learned advocate Mr.

Biswabrata Basu Mallick representing the State respondents was inadvertently not recorded in the order dated 3rd January, 2025.

5.

Be it recorded that, Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick learned advocate appeared on behalf of the State respondents on 3rd January, 2025.

6.

The name of the learned advocate Mr.

Bikram Halder representing the State respondents was wrongly recorded.

7.

The correct name of the learned junior advocate of the State respondent is Mr. Biman Halder. 8.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

( Amrita Sinha, J.)