Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
CRR/1421/2019 on 19 July, 2019
Author: Rajasekhar Mantha
Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha
1 19.07.2019275
Ct-14 pk C.R.R. 1421 of 2019 Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, Mr. Sourav Mondal ... for the Petitioner Mr. S. S. Imam and Mr. S. Kundu, learned advocates, who normally appear for the State, agree to represent it in the matter.
Let their appointment be regularised by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Calcutta.
Let a copy of the petition be served on them. The revisionist is aggrieved by order dated 30th April, 2018 passed in G. R. Case No. 709 of 2016.
By the impugned order the court below rejected an application of the de facto complainant/father of the deceased for further investigation. Such further investigation was declined by the court below since the cognizance has already been taken by the Magistrate and the charge sheet filed under Section 306 of the IPC.
The Magistrate is justified in his observation in paragraph 2 of the order that even course of trial, the Magistrate under Section 311 of Cr. P. C. may make any person other than accused persons arrayed and also make such new persons accused if there is sufficient evidence available against such third party under Section 319 of the Cr. P. C. In those circumstances, the revisional application is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.
Let a copy of the petition be served on them. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.
(Rajasekhar Mantha, J.)