Tapan Porel vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 4183 Cal

9.08.2021
   S.D.
    01.
                                        CRA 83 of 2016
                                   (Through video conference)

            In Re: - An Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
            Procedure, 1973.

            In the matter of:   Tapan Porel                  ....Appellant.



                  Mr. Ujjal Kumar Roy
                                                             ...for the Appellant.

                  Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld.P.P.,
                  Mr. Imran Ali
                  Mr. M.F.A. Begg                              ..for the State.



                   In compliance of this Court's order dated 3.8.2021, the

            Superintendent, Burdwan Correctional Home vide his Letter No.

            4756/RB    dated    4.8.2021   has   submitted    the   report        that   the

            appellant/convict was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for 7(seven)

            years and fine, with default clause for further imprisonment vide order

            and judgment dated 27/29.1.2016 passed by the learned Additional

            District & Sessions Judge, Chandernagore, Hooghly, which reflects that

            the appellant/convict has earned 404 (four hundred four) days remission

            till date, i.e. 1 year, 1 month and 14 days, but there is no record of pre-

            trial detention in the office of the Superintendent, Burdwan Central

            Correctional Home.       Although he requested the Superintendent,

            Chandernagore        Sub-Correctional      Home         wherefrom            the

            appellant/accused was received on transfer to provide his pre-trial

            detention period, U.T. Set off under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., but the

            Superintendent, Chandernagore Sub-Correctional Home could not
                              2




provide any information regarding pre-trial detention period in spite of

repeated & thorough searching of official records as reported by the said

authority vide Memo No. 45/EB dated 25.1.2017 which report of the Sub-

Correctional Home, Chandernagore is to the said effect.

      Let the report be kept on record.

      The order dated 3.8.2021 passed by this Court reflects that the

Superintendent, Burdwan Correctional Home had submitted his report

stating that the appellant has served the sentence for a period from

27.1.2016

to 29.7.2021, i.e. 05 yeas 06 months and 03 days as on 29.7.2021.

Now, on mathematical calculation and upon hearing Mr. Ujjal

Kumar Roy, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Imran Ali,

learned Advocate for the State and upon scrutiny of the original case

record, it transpires that pre-trial detention of the appellant/convict was

90 days from the first date of his detention on 22.2.2008 till 22.5.2008 as

the accused/appellant was admitted on statutory period and was

released in default of submission of charge sheet by the Investigating

Officer vide order dated 22.5.2008 passed by learned Trial Court.

Thus, the total period undergone by the appellant/convict is for a

period of 6 years 10 months and 29 days as on this date taken together

with the pre-trial detention and remission, hence, the appellant/accused

is yet to conclude his sentence for a period of 1 month and one day.

Now, Mr. Ujjal Kumar Roy, learned Advocate for the appellant

invites my attention to the evidence on record to submit that prosecution

case is doubtful and the appellant was falsely implicated by the defacto-

complainant out of the sheer grudge.

Since, the appeal is required to be dealt with on its merit upon

hearing learned Advocates for both the parties, let the matter be listed on

16.8.2021 under the heading "Appeal Hearing".

(Shivakant Prasad, J.)