Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Dr. Samir Kumar Adhikari vs Subhojit Ghosh & Anr on 5 January, 2021
Form No. J(2)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta
CRR 1731 of 2020
Dr. Samir Kumar Adhikari
Vs.
Subhojit Ghosh & Anr.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamalesh Bhattacharyya
Mr. Ashok Kumar Nath
Mr. Deepak Jain
For the opposite party 1 : Mr. Ajay Dutta
Mr. Bizendra Nath Manna
Ms. Arpita Basu
For the State : Mr. Imran Ali
Ms. Manasi Ray
Heard on: : 05th January 2021
Judgment on : : 05th January 2021
The Court:
Although, this is an application challenging the order
dated 16.10.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd
Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas in Case No. C-468/2019 under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the prime
grievances of the petitioner are that the accused jumped bail and is
not appearing regularly before the learned trial court, the Officer-in-
Charge of the local police station has not complied with the order of
the learned trial court and the impugned proceeding is getting
protracted.
A report filed on behalf of the State about intimating the
accused opposite party is taken on record.
Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner further submits as follows. Although the petitioner had filed
the petition of complaint in the early part of 2019, the proceeding has
not been concluded yet. The accused jumped bail and has not been
regularly appearing before the learned trial court. Even the Officer-in-
Charge of Garfa Police Station did not comply with the direction of the
learned trial court regarding issuance of warrant of arrest against the
accused.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused /
opposite party no. 1 submits as follows. The accused has now
surrendered before the learned trial court and obtained bail. The
opposite party no. 1 undertakes to attend the learned trial court
regularly.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits
that presently a new officer has joined as the Officer-in-Charge of
Garfa Police Station.
I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels for
the parties and have perused the revision petition.
It appears that some delay has occurred in the impugned
proceeding. The accused seems to be primarily responsible for such
delay.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the
learned trial court is requested to conclude the proceeding as
expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary
adjournment to any of the parties and by keeping in mind the
statutory stipulation about expeditious conclusion of proceeding
under the said act.
With these observations, the revisional application is
disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be
supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.
(Jay Sengupta,J.)
SB
