Central Bureau Of Investigation vs Rabindranath Biswas And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 7867 Cal

 D/L3                                 CRMSPL 42 of 2022
28.11.2022                                 With
    Bpg.
                                       CRAN 1 of 2022

                                Central Bureau of Investigation
                                        Versus
                               Rabindranath Biswas and others

                       Mr. Anirban Mitra,
                       Mr. Samrat Ghosh.
                                        ...for the petitioner.

                        Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed,
                        Ms. Ghazala Firdous,
                        Mr. Shibasish Banerjee,
                        Mr. Sk. Saidullah,
                        Ms. Smita Saha,
                        Mr. Mithun Mondal.
                                      ...for the opposite party nos.1 and 2.

                        Mr. Bishnupada Dutta,
                        Mr. Sudhakar Thakur.
                                    ...for the respondent no.3.

There is a delay of 910 days in preferring the appeal.

Mr. Mitra, learned advocate appearing for the CBI

submits that the present Special Leave to Appeal was preferred in

respect of a nationalised bank suffering loss and in spite of

materials appearing against the officers of the bank and the

beneficiaries, the learned trial court failed to appreciate the same in

its true perspective and acquitted all the accused persons.

Mr. Ahmed, learned advocate, appears on behalf of the

opposite party nos.1 and 2.

Mr. Dutta, learned advocate, appears on behalf of the

opposite party no.3.

Learned advocates appearing for the opposite parties

vehemently oppose the application under Section 5 of the Limitation

Act and submit that there are unexplained delay in the application

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and the Government

Department as usual drags the criminal case and in this case also

almost after 2½ years the Special Leave to Appeal has been

preferred. It is also contention of the learned advocate appearing

for the opposite parties that the learned trial court while delivering

the judgment has minutely scrutinised the evidence appearing on

record and there is no scope for reassessing the evidence after more

than 30 months of the same being passed.

I have considered the submissions advanced by the

learned advocate appearing for the CBI as well as that of the

opposite party nos.1,2 and 3. I find that there are disputed

questions of fact which have been argued both on behalf of the

petitioner/applicant as well as the private opposite parties. The

lower court records are required to assess in order to test the

genuineness of the same.

In view of the fact that the officer of the nationalised

bank disbursed the loan in violation of the banking rules and

regulations and the test of criminality is required to be assessed by

this Court, the delay which has occurred is hereby condoned.

Accordingly, CRAN 1 of 2022 is allowed.

In Re: CRMSPL 42 of 2022

The Special Leave prayed for in order to prefer the appeal

is allowed.

Liberty is granted to the petitioner to file their

memorandum of appeal within a period of 30 days from date.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)