Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Rita Saha & Ors vs Unknown on 5 August, 2022
05.8.2022
Court No.33
SD
CRR 1448 of 2020
With
CRAN 4 of 2022
In the matter of: Rita Saha & Ors.
....Petitioners.
Ms. Sutapa Sanyal
Mr. Gour Baran Sau
... for the Petitioners.
Mr. Swapan Banerjee
Mr. Suman De
... for the State.
The present revisional application was disposed of on May 10,
2022 by setting aside the order dated January 10, 2020 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Raigunj, Uttar Dinajpur which relates to
issuance of warrant, proclamation and attachment against the
petitioners.
The warrant of arrest which was issued against the petitioners,
was stayed and the petitioners undertake before this Court that the
petitioners would surrender before the jurisdictional court and
accordingly, this Court directed that if the petitioners surrender before
the jurisdictional court within June 30, 2020, the learned court will
consider his application for bail in accordance with law.
Copy of the order was sent to the learned advocate through
whatsapp but even after passing that order, learned advocate advised
them to file an application for anticipatory bail before the Hon'ble High
Court. The said application for anticipatory bail being CRM (A) 2629 of
2022 was rejected on 14.6.2022. Petitioner no.1 has now filed the
present application for modification of the order dated 10.5.2022. The
petitioner thus submits that due to mis-guidance by the erstwhile
advocate of the petitioners, he could not complied the order dated
10.5.2022 passed by this Court and as such, the said order may be
modified and the order of stay of warrant of arrest of the petitioners
may be extended.
The impugned question involved is that after disposal of the
present revisional application on May 10, 2022, the Court has become
functus officio and as such, whether the Court can intervene the
aforesaid prayer made by the petitioners.
In this context, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied
upon Rule 1 of Chapter XI read with Rule 28 of the Appellate Side
Rules of High Court at Calcutta and she also relied upon a judgment of
Snehendu Chowdhury & Ors. vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. reported
in 2005 SCC Online Cal 591.
She has also referred another judgment of Patna High Court in
Jaitun Bibi vs. The State of Bihar in Criminal Miscellaneous No.37761
of 2016.
Mr. Suman De, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
State submits that they have no objection if the prayer made by the
petitioners for extension of time is granted by this Court.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
that the petitioners undertake to surrender before the jurisdictional
court, the impugned warrant of arrest, if still in force, be stayed for a
period of two weeks from the date. If the petitioners surrender before
the jurisdictional court within August 18, 2022, the learned trial
court will consider his bail application in accordance with law.
In default, the warrant of arrest, if still in force, will revive.
Accordingly, CRAN 4 of 2022 is disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered
to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon
compliance of all formalities.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
