Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- TIRTHANKAR GHOSH
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. K. J. Yusuf, ld.AGP Mr. Parikshit Goswami Re … for the State-respondent(s) The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that his representation dated
13.05.2024 was not considered by the jurisdictional police station Bidhannagar Police Station. Mr. Yusuf, learned AGP, appears for the State and submits a report which reflects that Bidhannagar South PS Case No. 150 of 2024 was registered for investigation and consequent to conclusion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the jurisdictional Court. It is also reflected from the report that an order-sheet was received from the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bidhannagar North 24 Parganas vide MA Case No. 05 of 2024 which was under the relevant provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. Be that as it may, since the police authorities are well aware regarding the disputes existing, as such, at this belated stage, there is no scope for interference. However, if any inconveniences are being faced by the petitioner, he would file a fresh representation to the police authorities and the police authorities would assess regarding the veracity of the accusations, thereafter, take steps in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, WPA 14492 of 2024 is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Report so submitted be kept with the record. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
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.