Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Gauhati High Court

Central Bureau Of Investigation vs Swetabh Suman And 3 Ors. (H) on 28 January, 2019

Author: Suman Shyam

Bench: Suman Shyam

                                                                      Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010122622018




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

                                Case No. : Crl.Rev.P. 195/2018

            1:CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
            THROUGH ITS HEAD OF BRANCH, CBI/ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH,
            OPPOSITE BALAJI TEMPLE, BETKUCHI, GUWAHATI-35, ASSAM.

            VERSUS

            1:SWETABH SUMAN AND 3 ORS. (H)
            CIT (APPEAL), AAYKAR BHAWAN, CHRISTIAN BASTI, G.S ROAD,
            GUWAHATI-5, ASSAM

            2:SHRI RAMESH GOENKA
             S/O- LATE HANUMAN PRASAD GOENKA
             R/O- PRATISHTHA 30
             BISHNUPUR
             MAIN ROAD
             BISHNUPUR
             GUWAHATI-16

            3:SHRI PRANJAL SARMAH
             S/O- LATE HOREN SARMAH
             R/O- VILLAGE KARANGA
             P.O. AND P.S.-CINNAMARA
             DISTRICT- JORHAT
            ASSAM PIN- 786004

            4:SHRI PRATAP DAS
             S/O- LATE SUBODH RANJAN DAS
             KRISHNANAGAR
             SANI BARI ROAD
             NEAR LAKSHMI NARAYAN TEMPLE
             HOJAI. PIN- 78200

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S C KEYAL
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/2

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. A K BHATTACHARYYA (R2)




                                    BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

                                           ORDER

Date : 28-01-2019 Heard Ms. G. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. D.K. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel representing respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel lead by Mr. B.K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. None has appeared for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

Ms. Choudhury submits that notice could not be served upon the respondent No. 1 and therefore, the petitioner be granted leave to serve notice of this case on respondent No. 1 by hand. The learned counsel, however, could not point out the provision in the Cr.P.C. under which such a recourse was permissible.

Since the names of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 have not been shown in the cause list, this matter stands adjourned for a week.

Registry to list this matter by reflecting the name of learned counsel for the parties in the cause list.

Petitioner would be at liberty to renew the same prayer on the next date.

JUDGE GS Comparing Assistant