Rohan Roy vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 4615 Cal

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Rohan Roy vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 9 September, 2024

Author: T.S. Sivagnanam

Bench: T.S. Sivagnanam, Hiranmay Bhattacharyya

Form No. J.(2)
Item No. 10


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 APPELLATE SIDE

                                HEARD ON: 09.09.2024

                             DELIVERED ON: 09.09.2024
                                  CORAM:
                    THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
                                    AND
             THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
                                 M.A.T. 1558 of 2024

                                     Rohan Roy
                                         Vs.
                           The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Appearance:-
Mr. Rohan Roy                           ......... Appellant (In person)


Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Ld. Sr. Standing Counsel
Mr. Tarak Karan                  .........for the State


                                      JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)

1. We have heard Rohan Roy, appellant appearing in person. The appellant

was the writ petitioner in W.P.A. 10269 of 2024. The main prayer sought

for in the prayer was to issue a writ of Mandamus to the respondent

authorities, specifically to the Superintendent of Police, Lalbazar and the

Officer-in-Charge, Shaympukur Police Station to take appropriate steps

accordingly and make appropriate investigation on the basis of the

complaint made by the appellant/writ petitioner and to render police

protection for protection of life of the petitioner/appellant.

2. Prayer (d) is to quash and set aside the F.I.R. No. 243 of 2023 dated

January 1 2023. The other prayers are interim in nature.

3. The learned Single Bench examined the contentions advanced by the

appellant, who appeared in person and pointed out that the investigating

officer ought to have acted a bit more reasonably and given some more time

and opportunity to the writ petitioner/appellant to respond to the notice

under section 41A of Cr.P.C.

4. The learned Single Bench noted that the investigation of the subject case

was completed and charge-sheet has been laid and accordingly, left it open

to the writ petitioner/appellant to approach the learned Court in seisin of

the matter for any further relief that he seeks before us.

5. The writ petitioner/appellant appearing in person would reiterate the

submissions made before the learned writ Court and also referred to

certain averments made in the writ petition.

6. Be that as it may, the writ petitioner/appellant has sought for appropriate

investigation on the basis of his complaint and for police protection. The

investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been laid. If,

according to the appellant, the investigation was not proper, then the

appellant has got sufficient remedies under the relevant statute. The prayer

for quashing the F.I.R. cannot be entertained that too in a petition filed

under Article 226 of the Constitution.

7. Therefore, we dispose of this appeal leaving it open to the appellant to raise

all issues including the issues canvassed in the writ petition before the

learned writ Court before which, the charge-sheet has been laid.

8. No costs.

9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished to

the parties expeditiously upon compliance of all legal formalities.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE I agree.

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

Pallab/KS AR(Ct.)