Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

An Application Under Section 438 Of The vs Unknown on 2 May, 2016

Author: Patherya

Bench: Patherya

                                            1




2.05.2016
23

m.d.

Rejected C.R.M. 2076 of 2016 In the matter of an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure affirmed on 10.3.2016 in connection with Bagnan Police Station Case No.111/2009 dated 08/05/2009 under Sections 147/148/149/326/302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9 (b) of the Indian Explosives Act.

In Re: Sk. Abdul Gafran @ Sk. Abdul Gofran ... Petitioner Mr. Prabir Mitra ...for the petitioner Mr. Prasun Dutta, Mr. Subrata Roy ... for the State The petitioner, apprehending arrest, in connection with Bagnan Police Station Case No.111/2009 dated 08/05/2009 under Sections 147/148/149/326/302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9 (b) of the Indian Explosives Act, has filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

This application is second in point of time. C.R.M. 5672 of 2010 was rejected by order dated 06-05-2010.

According to counsel for the petitioner, change in circumstance exists in issuance of letter dated 31st December, 2012. This letter, according to counsel for the State, is no change of circumstance and in no way is the petitioner prejudiced.

It is true that the letter dated 31st December, 2012 is 2 by the Legal Remembrancer's Office to the District Magistrate, Howrah, that the Government would have no objection in withdrawal of the case under Section 321 Cr.PC., only if the Public Prosecutor finds it fit for withdrawal on merit.

We are not aware of what steps have been taken by the Public Prosecutor for withdrawal. In fact, the said would also not be necessary, in view of the letter dated 9th July, 2012 sent by the Public Prosecutor's Office to the Legal Remembrancer.

As no change circumstance exists, this application merits no order and is rejected.

In view of the aforesaid, this application is rejected and dismissed.

Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis upon compliance of all formalities.

(Patherya, J.) (Debi Prosad Dey,J.) 3