✦ Calcutta High Court · 14 Sep 2001

Mr. Arijit Ganguly v. State of Sikkim reported in (2001) 6 SCC

TIRTHANKAR GHOSH2 min read

Case at a glance

Order date
14 Sep 2001
Bench
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

Provisions considered

Judgment

Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Mr. Sandip Chakraborty … For the State. This revisional application was preferred challenging the order dated 06.01.2006 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Paschim Medinipur in G.R. No. 1389 of 2001 arising out of Belda Police Station Case No. 104 of 2001 dated 14.09.2001 under Sections 419/420/469/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code. The preliminary involves in this revisional application is rejection of the petitioner’s prayer for sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As none appears on behalf of the State, Mr. Arijit Ganguly, learned advocate along with Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, learned advocate, who ordinarily appear for the State, are directed to appear in this matter and represent the State. Their appointment may be regularized by the concerned authorities. At the time of admission of this revisional application, it was specifically observed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 26.06.2006 that plea taken by the petitioner can be raised 2 at any stage and as such, stay was refused. In fact, the said view of the co-ordinate Bench is supported by the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. K. Pradhan Vs. State of Sikkim reported in (2001) 6 SCC 704. Having regard to the period of time which has elapsed and the fact that the case was initiated in the year 2001, I am of the opinion that the plea taken up in this revisional application cannot be interfered at the initial stage at which the petitioner approached this Court. However, the petitioner would be at liberty, if situation so demands, to canvass the point regarding sanction under Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the appropriate stage, if the trial of the case has not already been concluded. With the aforesaid observations, revisional application being CRR 1770 of 2006 is disposed of. All pending connected applications, if any, are consequently disposed of. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 197, 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 120B, 419, 420, 469, 471.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Calcutta High Court, on 14 Sep 2001. The bench was TIRTHANKAR GHOSH.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Calcutta High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments