Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
Ct. 13
Item No.84
14.07.2021
(suvendu)
WPA 10973 OF 2021
Tapan Karak
Vs.
State of West Bengal Ors.
(Via Video Conference)
Mr. Soujanya Bandyopadhyay
….for the petitioner
Mr. Amitesh Banerjee
…….for the State
Mr. Subhankar Chakraborty
Mr. Saptarshi Bhattacharjee
Ms. Ruchira Manna
…..for the private respondents
The grievance of the petitioner is that the private
respondents have killed his daughter in her marital house. It
is submitted that the petitioner was not even allowed by the
police to see the dead body of his daughter. It is also
submitted that a complaint was lodged on 4 th June, 2021
with Bagnan Police Station and yet no FIR has been
registered.
Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, learned senior counsel for the
State, submits that a UD case was registered by the Bagnan
P.S. initially and an FIR has been registered on 13 th July,
2021 being Bagnan Police Station Case No. 340 of 2021
dated 13th July, 2021 under Sections 498A/304/302 of the
Indian Penal Code and under the provisions of the DV Act.
The private respondents seek time to answer the writ
petition.
2
This Court is of the prima facie view that there has
been some delay in registering FIR, by the Bagnan Police
Station and the same has been done since after the receipt
the copy of the writ petition.
The Officer-in-Charge of Bagnan Police Station is
directed to file a report indicating the steps taken by them in
respect of the FIR on the adjourned date. Bagnan Police
Station shall also explain as to why there was a delay in
registering the FIR. It shall also be explained as to why
section 120B of the IPC has not been included in the FIR.
Let this matter be adjourned for two weeks.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)
