Anil Kumar Bhattacharya vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 5631 Cal

09.11.2021
Item No.15
suman
Ct.25
                            (Via Video Conference)

                               CRR 1259 of 2007

                               With
                 CRAN 1 of 2007 (Old CRAN 587 of 2007)

             In the matter of: Anil Kumar Bhattacharya


                         Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee
                         Ms. Nandini Chatterjee
                         Mr. Nazir Ahmed
                         Mr. S. Naskar
                         Ms. Ritushree Banerjee
                         Ms. Pritha Sinha
                               ...for the petitioner


                         The instant revision is filed by one Anil

                 Kumar Bhattacharya challenging legality, validity

                 and propriety of the judgment and order of acquittal

                 dated 28th October, 2005 passed by the learned

                 Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court at Barasat in

                 S. T. No.1(6)02/S.C. 10(2)01. By passing the said

                 judgment the learned trial Judge acquitted the

                 respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from the charge under

Section 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code. The

petitioner being the father of the victim /deceased

filed the instant revision.

It is submitted by Mr. Jayanta Narayan

Chatterjee, learned advocate for the petitioner that

he was appointed by the High Court Legal Services

Committee, Calcutta to represent the petitioner. It is

informed that during pendency of the instant

revision the petitioner has expired. Mr. Chatterjee

further submits that it is not possible for him to take

information as to whether the legal heirs and

successors of the petitioner, since deceased are

interested to proceed with the instant revision or not.

Even if they are interested to proceed with the

instant revision a fresh order of appointment in the

name of Mr. Chatterjee or any other advocate is

required from the High Court Legal Services

Committee to continue the instant proceeding.

In view of such circumstances, the High

Court Legal Services Committee is directed to inquire

as to whether the legal heirs and successors of the

original petitioner Mr. Anil Kumar Bhattacharya,

since deceased are willing to proceed with the instant

revision or not. A report shall be filed by the High

Court Legal Services Committee to such effect within

six weeks from the date.

In the meantime, let the instant revision go

out of list with liberty to Mr. Chatterjee to mention

the matter under any changed circumstance.

Mr. Chatterjee is at liberty to act on the

server copy of the order.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)