Sankar Biswas vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 1316 Gua

                                                                       Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010082372021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                 Case No. : Crl.L.P./13/2021

            SANKAR BISWAS
            S/O- LATE HEMESH CH. BISWAS, R/O- GOTANAGAR (SATIJOYMATI
            NAGAR), BYE LANE NO. 7, H/NO. 81, P.O. GOTANAGAR, P.S. JALUKBARI,
            GUWAHATI- 781033, KAMRUP(M), ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            REP. BY THE LD. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

            2:MRINAL KANTI SARKAR
             S/O- LATE BRAJENDRA KUMAR SARKAR
             PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 281/B
             CENTRAL GOTANAGAR
             MALIGAON
             GUWAHATI-11
             DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR D CHAKRABORTY

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                   BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
                     HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MALASRI NANDI

                                          ORDER

Date : 20-04-2022 Page No.# 2/3

Suman Shyam, J

Heard Mr. D. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner. We have also heard

Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. P.P. Assam appearing for the State/ respondent No. 1. None

has appeared for the respondent No. 2, although the name of Mr. K.K. Singh, learned

counsel is shown in the cause list.

This Crl. Leave Petition No. 13/2021 has been filed with a prayer to grant leave to

appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the court of learned

SDJM(S) No. 2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in C.R. No. 2964/2015.

By inviting attention of this Court to the materials available on record, Mr.

Chakraborty has argued that this is a clear case of cheating whereby the respondent No.

2 has fraudulently executed a subsequent sale deed by misleading his client and without

cancelling the previous registered deed involving the same property. The complainant/

petitioner had lead sufficient evidence to establish the said fact. However, the learned trial

court had failed to appreciate the evidence available on record and thereby dismissed the

complaint. Mr. Chakraborty, therefore, submits that the impugned judgment suffers from

perversity warranting interference by this Court.

The learned Addl. P.P. Assam has not disputed the contentions advanced by the

petitioner's counsel.

In view of the above and having gone through the impugned judgment, we are of

the view that the matter calls for reconsideration by this Court. As such, leave, as prayed Page No.# 3/3

for, is hereby granted.

This leave petition stands allowed.

Registry to list the connected appeal for admission in due course.

Leave petition stands disposed of.

                          JUDGE                      JUDGE
GS




Comparing Assistant