Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Chanchalpati Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 22 March, 2017
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
Form No. J(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Ashim Kumar Roy
C.R.R. No. 1490 of 2013
Chanchalpati Das
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
With
C.R.R. No. 3307 of 2013
Madhu Pandit Das
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
For the petitioners : Mr. Sandipan Ganguly,
Mr. Debangan Bhattacharyya.
For the opposite party no.2 : Mr. Sudipta Moitra,
Mr. Debabrata Banerjee.
For the State : Mr. Anand Keshri.
Heard on : April 12, 2016.
Judgment on : 22.03.2017.
Both the petitioners in C.R.R. No. 1490 of 2013
(Chanchalpati Das - Vs.- The State of West Bengal & Anr.) and
C.R.R. No. 3307 of 2013 (Madhu Pandit Das - Vs. - The State of West
Bengal & Anr.) have approached this Court for quashing of the
charge-sheet relating to Ballygunge Police Station Case No. 33 of
2009 where both of them have been charge-sheeted under Sections
468/471/406/120B IPC. In the FIR, the petitioners have been described as the accused nos.1 and 2.
It was the case against them that they hatched up a criminal conspiracy and pursuant to such conspiracy, they dishonestly and illegally took away one luxury bus bearing Registration No.WB-25A- 0454 from the custody of the registered owner, ISKCON.
It was the further case of the de facto complainant that after taking it away to Bangalore on the strength of some fake documents, the accused persons got the bus registered with R.T.A, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore and obtained a new registration number KA 02-MC 7272 and the registered owner was changed as the President, ISKCON, Bangalore.
It is their further case that the President, ISKCON, Bangalore had no connection with ISKCON, Kolkata.
Mr. Sandipan Ganguly in support of this application claimed that no case has been made out which may justify the submission of the charge-sheet for the above offences. He further contends that the allegations are absolutely false and no offence can be said to have committed since ISKCON is one and only one entity and therefore, even if it is assumed that registered owner of the said luxury bus has been changed in favour of President, ISKCON, Bangalore, it cannot be said any case of criminal breach of trust has been made out.
On the other hand, Mr. Moitra appearing with Mr. Debabrata Banerjee on behalf of the de facto complainant and the learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing. Both of them vehemently contended that the case of the petitioner entirely based on disputed question of facts and their defence and that cannot be gone into at this stage.
I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. I have gone through the case diary and more particularly through the charge-sheeted materials.
Going through the same, in my opinion, undoubtedly, a prima facie case has been made out for which charge-sheet has been submitted. The grounds on which the quashing has been sought for are essentially the defence of the petitioners and are pure question of facts.
Having regard to above, in my opinion, the question of quashing of charge-sheet does not arise at all.
Accordingly, both the criminal revisions stand dismissed. However, this order will not preclude the petitioners to take all the points taken in this petition at the appropriate stage of the proceeding in accordance with law.
I also make it clear that I have not gone into the merit of the case and it would be left open for the trial court to consider the same in accordance with law.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)