Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Bhakti Nirmal Acharya Maharaj vs The State Of W.B. & Anr on 6 July, 2017
7.2017 CRR 1293 of 2014
34.
Bhakti Nirmal Acharya Maharaj
vs.
The State of W.B. & Anr.
Mr. S. Dasgupta ..For the petitioner.
Mr. K. Mondal ..For the opposite party no. 2.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has filed this revisional application challenging, inter alia, that for the purpose of taking cognizance under section 295A IPC, a sanction under section 196 of Cr.P.C is required. According to him since the State Government/District Magistrate had not given such permission, so the proceedings cannot go on against him.
On perusal of the FIR, I find that there is no ingredient of the Section 295A of IPC. The Section 295A of IPC relates to deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting it religion or religious beliefs, but the story of FIR speaks of theft and misleading court. Naturally, there is no use of getting any sanction in terms of 196 of CR.P.C. So there is no merit in this revisional application. Cognizance taken by the learned trial court and so far as the proceeding initiated under section 295A of IPC is hereby quashed.
The revisional application is allowed in part. The case will go on in respect of other offences. The trial court is requested to get it done within a year from the date of receipt of copy of this order CRR 1293 of 2014 is disposed of.
Photostat certified copy of this be given to the parties, if applied for, by giving priority.
( Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J. )