Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Lalita Saraogi And Anr vs The State Of West Bengal And Anr on 4 January, 2023
Author: Bibek Chaudhuri
Bench: Bibek Chaudhuri
04.01.2023 Item No.08.
Suman Ct.42 CRR 2604 of 2022 Lalita Saraogi and Anr.
Vs. The State of West Bengal and Anr.
Mr. K. R. Thaker Mr. Partha Sarathi Das ..for the petitioners Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury Mr. Sandip Chakraborty ...for the State The petitioners being erstwhile directors of a company under the name and style of ASK Financial Limited are implicated in connection with Debra Police Station Case No. 234 of 2017 dated 2nd May, 2017 under Sections 120B/406/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code presently pending before the learned Special Judge, 1st Court, Paschim Medinipur.
The petitioners have prayed for quashing of the said criminal proceeding on the ground that the present petitioners transferred the ownership or the Company in favour of one Manoranjan Roy of Pincon Infrastructure Limited. ASK Financial Limited was, therefore, merged with Pincon. Subsequently Pincon indulged in cheating fund business and raised huge amount of money from the general public. Over 2 the said incident previously a case was registered against said Manoranjan Roy and others where the present petitioners were also arrayed as accused persons. In the said case vide order dated 10th October, 2012 the Division Bench of this Court granted bail to the petitioners holding, inter alia, that b before 3rd October, 2012 there was no transaction of collection of money from the general public as a cheat fund which was done by Pincon. Subsequently the petitioners were acquitted.
It is submitted by the petitioners that on the basis of a complaint of another person who was defrauded, the present petitioners have been entangled in the self-same offence for the selfp-same period and he cannot be vexed twice.
Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury, learned P.P.-in-charge submits that Debra P. S. Case No.234 of 2017 was filed by different de facto complainant for different period and for different amounts and the principle of Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not lie.
The instant revision requires to be heard at length. Therefore, the revision be admitted.
The petitioner is directed to serve notice upon the private opposite party under registered speed post with A/D and file affidavit of service within three weeks from the date of this order.
In the meantime, further proceedings of G.R. Case No.1428 of 2017 pending before the learned Special Judge, 3 1st Court, Paschim Medinipore be stayed for a period of six weeks in respect of the present petitioners.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)