Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Goutam Banerjee & Anr vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 30 September, 2022
Item no. 03
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam
And
The Hon'ble Justice Supratim Bhattacharya
MAT 1638 of 2022
with
IA No. CAN 1 of 2022
Goutam Banerjee & Anr.
vs.
State of West Bengal & ors.
Appearance:
For the Appellants : Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Prabir Kr. Mitra
Mr. Ayan Bhattahcharya
Mr. Pinak Kr. Mitra
Ms. Ariba Sahab
For the State : Mr. Anirban Ray, Ld. G.P.
Mr. T.M. Siddique
Mr. Debasis Ghosh
Mr. Arijit Chakraborty
Mr. Nilotpal Chatterjee
Mr. Soumitra Mukherjee
For the petitioner in
W.P.A. 16929 of 2022: Mr. Rudranil De
Mr. Navanil De
Mr. Sukanta Chakraborty
Mr. R. Chakraborty
Mr. S. Ghosh
Mr. S. Dey
Heard on : 30.09.2022
2
Judgment on : 30.09.2022
T.S. Sivagnanam, J.:
1. This intra-Court appeal has been filed by Goutam Banerjee and
Monideepa Banerjee, both advocates enrolled with the Bar Council of
West Bengal. They are aggrieved by the order passed by the learned
Single Bench dated 26th September, 2022 wherein certain observations
have been made by the learned Judge as the matter was heard by the
learned Court on several occasions and several directions and
observations have been made from time to time. We find that the order
dated 26th September, 2022 is not a final order and the matter has been
directed to be listed before the Court on 15 th November, 2022. Thus, the
present appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is not
maintainable as against the said order dated 26 th September, 2022.
2. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the
appellants submitted that in page 2 of the order dated 26 th September,
2022 certain observations have been made and those observations
should not be construed as positive directions issued to the investigating
agency and the appellants have no further qualms for the investigating
agency to conduct the investigation and the appellants have been
cooperating with the investigating agency and they will continue to
extend their cooperation with the said agency.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents would submit that the writ petition was heard on several
dates, persons have deposed before the Court in person and sealed cover
reports have been called for, which had been perused by the learned
Court and thereafter directions have been issued and the matter will be
heard on 15th November, 2022.
4. As pointed earlier, since the impugned order in this appeal is not
a final order and this intra-Court appeal is not maintainable. However,
we wish to state the legal position namely that the investigating agency
is bound to carry on investigation in a fair and transparent manner.
The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and allied laws have clearly
mentioned about the procedures to be followed when a criminal
investigation is being done. Therefore, until and unless a positive
direction is issued by a Court to arrest a person, it cannot be construed
as a direction. Therefore, the investigating agency should apply its mind
to the facts in issue and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. This
is all that we can observe in this appeal, which we have held to be not
maintainable.
5. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed, however without
any order as to costs. Consequently, the connected application also
stands disposed of.
(T.S. Sivagnanam, J.)
I agree.
(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)
RP/PG (AR. CT.)
