✦ Calcutta High Court

Swapan Mondal & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal Mr. Ujjal Ray Sk. Abdur Rahim & Anr.

No. 1117 of 2021AJAY KUMAR GUPTA4 min read

Case at a glance

Bench
AJAY KUMAR GUPTA

Provisions considered

Judgment

6.

Alternatively, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners also submits that liberty may be given to the petitioners so that they may file an application praying for discharge from the case as the charge has not yet been framed in the present case.

7.

Learned counsel representing the State produces the case diary as well as memo of evidence and submits that there is sufficient material to substantiate a prima facie case against the petitioners. Learned counsel further draws the attention of the court that the FIR was registered against the de-facto complainant on the basis of the order passed by the learned Magistrate in an application filed under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. The said complaint against the de facto complainant was the counterblast of the present case; as such, application is liable to be dismissed.

8.

Despite service, none appears on behalf of the de facto complainant/opposite party no. 2 at the time of call. No accommodation was sought for.

9.

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties, this court would not like to enter into the merits of the present case, when there is an alternative prayer. 4 There is a legal provision available to the petitioners to pray for discharge before the Trial Court before framing of charges; otherwise, the petitioners would lose one forum to ventilate their grievances for discharge from the instant case.

10.

Consequently, the petitioners’ alternative prayer considered and allowed. The petitioners shall be at liberty to ventilate their grievance for discharge before the learned Court below by filing appropriate application in accordance with law. The learned Magistrate shall decide the application, if filed, independently and on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations whatsoever made hereinabove.

11.

With the above observations, CRR 3350 of 2022 is, thus, disposed of.

12.

Consequently, the connected applications, if any, are, thus, disposed of.

13.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

14.

Let the order be communicated to the Ld. Court below for information.

15.

All parties shall act in terms of the copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.

16.

Concerned Department is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, 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.

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 case no. No. 1117 of 2021). ← Search more judgments