Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Munmun Ghosh & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 10 February, 2022
10.02.2022 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Item No.18 CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
Ct.No.34
dc.
C.R.R. 21 of 2017
with
CRAN 2 of 2017 (Old No. CRAN 3501 of 2017)
(Via Video Conference)
Munmun Ghosh & Ors.
versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
In Re: An Application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed for quashing of the
proceedings being G.R. Case No. 1130 of 2015 arising out of
Shibpur Police Station Case No. 84 of 2015 dated 18.02.2015
under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code pending before
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Howrah.
Mr. Antarikshya Basu,
Ms. Debarshi Brahma,
Mr. Sayan Mukherjee,
Ms. Madhumita Basak ... For the Petitioners.
Mr. S. G. Mukherjee, Ld. P.P.,
Mr. Arijit Ganguly,
Ms. Sayanti Santra ... For the State.
Mr. Satadru Lahiri,
Mr. Sourav Paul,
Mr. Shirsho Dasgupta ... For the Opposite Party No.2.
This revisional application was preferred challenging
the proceedings relating to Shibpur Police Station Case No.
84 of 2015 dated 18.02.2015. This revisional application was
filed in the year 2017 and was affirmed on 4th January, 2017.
Mr. S. G. Mukherjee, learned Public Prosecutor,
appearing for the State draws the attention of this Court to
the fact that charge-sheet was submitted on 31.08.2016. As
such, the sole FIR could not have been the contention before
this Court and the petitioners have never challenged the
materials collected by the investigating agency or the
conclusion arrived at. Neither there is any whisper in any of
the paragraphs of this revisional application regarding the
charge-sheet has been filed.
Mr. Basu, learned advocate appearing for the
petitioners has refuted such contention of the learned Public
Prosecutor by relying upon judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Anand Kumar Mohatta and Another Vs.
State (NCT of Delhi), Department of Home and Another
reported in (2019) 11 Supreme Court Cases 706 and in Joseph
Salvaraj A. Vs. State of Gujarat and Others reported in (2011)
7 Supreme Court Cases 59.
On appreciation of the facts on which the law has been
laid down in both the aforesaid cases it reveals that the
application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure was preferred challenging the first information
report and during the pendency of such application before the
High Court, the investigating authorities on conclusion of
investigation, submitted charge-sheet and as such, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to observe that if such
an event takes place, then the High Court is not barred from
exercising the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure on technical grounds. This is factually a
different circumstance from the present revisional application
which was filed subsequent to the charge-sheet having been
filed. The revisional application, as such, is not maintainable.
The petitioners are granted liberty to file afresh by
challenging both the first information report and the charge-
sheet, if so advised.
Needless to mention that this Court has not gone into
the merits of this revisional application and restricted itself
only to the maintainability of this revisional application to the
extent that when charge-sheet has already been filed, the
petitioners cannot exclusively and solely challenge the FIR.
With the aforesaid observations, the revisional
application being CRR 21 of 2017 is disposed of.
Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.
All pending connected applications, if any, are
consequently disposed of.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order
duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied
for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all
requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
