C.R.R. No.2094 of 2018
In Re: An application under Section 401 read with Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In the matter of:-
Madhumita Ghosh anr.
Mr. Mritunjoy Chatterjee
…for the petitioners
Mr. Binoy Kr. Panda,
Mr. Subham Bhakat
…for the State
The impugned order dated 3rd February, 2018 passed by the
Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar, North
24 Parganas in connection with case being G.R. No.157 of 2016
now pending before Learned A.C.J.M., Bidhannagar under
Sections 341/Section323/Section354/Section506 of the I.P.C. rejecting the prayer for
discharge is the subject of challenge in this revisional application.
Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the learned
court below has failed to appreciate the materials already collected
in the C.D., and in a mechanical manner has proceeded to frame
charge against the accused persons rejecting the prayer for
It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the
petitioners that in this case allegations under Section 354 I.P.C
has been made by the defacto complainant (woman) against a
woman, namely Madhumita Ghosh (petitioner no.1 in this case). It
is thus, proposed that an order of quashment may be recorded in
this case in order to prevent abuse of the process of the Court.
Learned advocate, Mr. Panda representing the State after
receiving the copy of application submits that the learned court
below has already considered the materials already collected in the
C.D. and upon consideration of the entire aspect of this case
proceeded to frame charge after rejecting the prayer for discharge.
It is, thus, made known by learned advocate for the State that
the learned court below is now at this stage of collecting evidence
of the witnesses cited in the charge-sheet.
Learned advocate for the State further submits that when the
learned court below is at the stage of collecting evidence, the
prayer for quashment at this stage is not encouraging one and,
accordingly, the same should be refused.
Upon perusal of the order dated 3rd February, 2018, it appears
that the revisionists/petitioners have been charge-sheeted under
Sections 341/Section323/Section354/Section506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. Even
assuming for a moment though not admitting to be true that the
allegation against the petitioner no.1 namely Madhumita Ghosh
was raised by defacto complainant, who is the woman, but in that
event too, the revisionists cannot be exonerated from the instant
case keeping in view the other charges levelled against her.
However, such defence as raised by the petitioners may once again
be taken up at the time of trial in accordance with the law.
The point in dispute between the parties is rested on the sole
ground of non-consideration of the materials already collected in
the C.D. during investigation stage in its real perspective. It is also
brought to the notice of the Court that earlier in connection with
CRR 162 of 2017 with CRAN 256 of 2017 the coordinate Bench of
this Court disposed of the said revisional application directing the
revisionists to take up all points at the time of consideration of
Adverting to such copy of the order, learned advocate for the
petitioners submits that even after agitating the points before the
learned court below, while making consideration of the charge, the
points raised were not duly appreciated, and as such the same
It is the settled proposition of law that any point, what could
not be considered at the time of consideration of charge, may once
again be agitated at the time of trial. In that view of the matter, the
revisionists are not remediless, and if the instant revisional
application is disposed of giving direction upon the
petitioners/revisionists to raise all such points once again at the
time of trial, and if any such point is raised, the learned court
below shall try to address the same and decide the issue in
accordance with the law, there will be no prejudice occasioned to
either of the parties to this case, and rather it will subserve the
purpose of justice.
Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar, in
connection with G.R. Case No.157 of 2016 is directed to proceed
with the trial of this case giving sufficient opportunity upon the
revisionists/accused persons to raise and agitate points, now
raises, at the time of trial, and if any such point is raised, that
shall be duly addressed to by the learned court below, and decide
the issue in accordance with the law.
Learned court below is further directed to secure expeditious
disposal of the pending case by conducting the trial in a most
efficacious manner giving sufficient opportunities to either of the
parties to this case without granting unnecessary adjournment,
unless it is unavoidable.
With this observation/direction, this revisional application
stands disposed of.
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be
given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of
all necessary formalities.
(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)