Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Sachin Kumar Dey vs Sri Adwaita Kumar Hait & Anr on 13 June, 2022
13.06.2022
S/L No.4
KS
C.R.R. 3079 of 2014
With
IA No.CRAN 1 of 2014 (Old No. CRAN 3712 of 2014)
Sri Sachin Kumar Dey
-Vs.-
Sri Adwaita Kumar Hait & Anr.
Mr. Kanak Kiran Bandyopadhyay
Mr. B. Bhunia
.....For the Petitioner
Mr. Binay Panda
Ms. Puspita Saha
.....For the State
Party/parties is/are represented in the order by their name/names as
printed above in the cause title.
Mr. Kanak Kiran Bandyopadhyay, learned advocate appears for the
petitioner. Ms. Puspita Saha, learned advocate appears for the State.
The matter is listed today for hearing and compliance of the earlier
order dated 07.04.2022.
Administrative Report has been received from the Registry
informing that notice has been served upon the petitioner and opposite
party no.1. The same is kept with the record.
Mr. Bandyopadhyay, learned advocate for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has executed a fresh Vakalatnama in his favour but as
the earlier advocate on record Mr. Adhikary has not been found, he could
not obtain a no objection from him. Learned advocate for the petitioner
2
produces a letter before this Court by which Mr. Kanak Kiran
Bandyopadhyay, has been empowered as learned advocate for the
petitioner. Same be kept with the record.
Perused the letter addressed in favour of the learned advocate for
his engagement by the petitioner. Learned advocate is granted leave to file
his Vakalatnama before the Department by the end of this day without no
objection.
Petitioner has filed the instant revisional application under Section
401/397 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure assailing
the judgment and order passed on 08.04.2014 by learned Sessions Judge,
Purba Midnapur in Criminal Appeal No.3990 of 2013, affirming the order
of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purba Medinipur in C.R. Case No.698
of 2017 under Section 138 of the N. I. Act. The petitioner is sentenced to
suffer simple imprisonment for 10 days and to pay compensation to the
complainant amounting to Rs.1,65,000/- within two months from the date
of judgment.
Learned advocate submits that the entire compensation amount has
been paid and the petitioner has undergone sentence for more than 10
days. Under such situation, the petitioner is not inclined to proceed with
this revisional application and the same may be disposed of.
Perused the xerox copy of orders passed in C.R. Case No.698 of 2007
wherefrom it appears that P.C.R. No.82/38 dated 22.07.2015, showing
payment of Rs.1,65,000/- was placed before the Court. The payment of
compensation has satisfied a part of the order relating to compensation
granted in favour of the complainant. However, it is not clear if the
3
substantive portion of the sentence has been fully satisfied by this
petitioner/convict. No copy of order has been produced to show that there
has been execution of the sentence against the accused person. A xerox
copy of the order dated 14.07.2015 bearing no number of the case as in the
other order-sheets reflects that the accused was produced from JC on
14.7.2015
that date and the next date for production was 28.07.2015. This
order does not indicate that the same is in consonance with the procedural
laws as the convict could not have been treated as an UTP and asked for
production after a fortnight. In order to satisfy his substantive sentence
there should be an order for execution of the sentence indicating the
number of days of substantive sentence and issuance of warrant of
sentence.
Since the petitioner does not want to proceed with the matter any
further, the revisional application is disposed of.
Learned Magistrate is also directed to ascertain from the Case
Record (C.R. Case No.698 of 2007) if the petitioner/convict has already
undergone the substantive sentence and execute the sentence if not already
executed.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court of the Learned Sessions
Judge, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur and to the Court of the Learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Purba Medinipur at Tamluk for information.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order downloaded
from the official website of this Court.
Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied
to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.
(Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
