SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mrinal Kanti Bose vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 20 February, 2019



CRR 2530 of 2018

Mrinal Kanti Bose

State of West Bengal anr.

Mr. Souvik Maji,
Mr. Arindam Deb Roy,
…for the petitioner
Mr. Binoy Panda,
Mr. Subham Bhakat,
…for the State.

This revisional application is basically for obtaining a direction to the

expeditious disposal of a pending case. The incident relates to 2015. Police, on

the basis of complaint submitted by the defacto complainant, held investigation

and submitted charge sheet against the accused persons under Sections

498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code. The case arises out of Baguiati Police

Station case no. 1071 dated 13/11/2015.

Learned advocate Mr. Binoy Panda representing the State submits that he

is authorised to ensure defence in the interest of the State of West Bengal.

The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the revisional application upon

Mr. Panda. On his submission, I entrust Mr. Panda to put up his defence in

this case in the interest of State of West Bengal. The appointment of Mr. Panda

may accordingly, be regularised by passing necessary order.

Learned advocate for the revisionist submits that one of the accused

persons happens to be a septuagenarian, for which conclusion of the trial is



In this case charge against the accused persons has already framed on

27/2/2018 and the trial court is in the midst of recording evidence of

witnesses, cited in the charge sheet. From the charge sheet enclosed with the

case records, it appears that as many as five witnesses are cited in the charge

sheet, out of which two are said to have either examined or in the process of

about to finish the examination of P.W.2.

The basic right of the litigant seeking speedy justice finds place in the

concept of criminal justice delivery system, but this aspect of speedy justice has

to be interpreted in the context of mitigating substances, if there be any. The

trial court appears to have put its best possible efforts to conduct the trial by

examining the witnesses. Since one of the co-accused is submitted to be

septuagenarian, some sort of accommodation may be made by the trial court

subject to its convenience.

According to the learned advocate for the revisionist Mr. Souvik Maji, the

pending case has already been transferred to the file of learned ACJM,

Bidhannagar from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court Barasat

under Section 410 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The direction, as such,

needs to be taken care of relying upon the submission of the learned advocate

for the revisionist.

Learned ACJM, Bidhannagar is directed to dispose of the case as

expeditiously as possible putting his best possible efforts without granting any

unnecessary adjournment, unless it is avoidable and further granting sufficient

opportunity to prosecution.


With this observation and direction, this revisional application stands

disposed of. No order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the

parties, upon compliance of necessary formalities.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation