Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tanusree Bhattacharyya vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 7 November, 2014
Author: Joymalya Bagchi
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi
1 07.11.2014(99)
(ap) C.R.R. No. 976 of 2014 Tanusree Bhattacharyya Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Re: An application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 20.03.2014 Ms. Devi Priya Mitra. ...For the petitioner.
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee. ...For the O.P. No.2.
The petitioner is the de facto complainant in the instant case. At her behest Garfa Police Station Case No. 137 of 2012 corresponding to ACGR 5176 of 2012 under Sections 498A/325/406/315 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 66(c) of the I.T. Act was registered.
The opposite party no.2 had obtained pre‐arrest bail from the learned Sessions Judge, Alipore, South 24 Parganas. Such order of pre‐arrest bail was cancelled by the Division Bench of this Court in C.R.M. No. 13444 of 2012. The opposite party no.2 was directed to surrender before the trial Court. In the meantime charge‐sheet had been filed under Sections 498A/325/406 of the Indian Penal Code. The opposite party no.2 appeared before the trial Court and has been enlarged on bail.
The petitioner had made prayer for further investigation in the matter as she was aggrieved by the nature of investigation and the non‐submissions of charge‐sheet under graver offences.
In spite of making such application, it is the grievance of the petitioner that the matter has been transferred for trial and disposal.
Ms. Mitra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the learned Magistrate ought not to proceed with the trial of the case without considering 1 2 the application for further investigation. She further submitted that there is a direction passed by this Court in W.P. No. 12617 (W) of 2013 giving liberty to her client to make prayer for further investigation.
Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 opposes such prayer of the petitioner.
Having considered the rival submissions of the parties and the materials on record, I am of the opinion that the prayer for further investigation requires to be considered before the trial Court embarks to the next stage of consideration of framing of charge.
Accordingly, the trial Court is directed to consider the application for further investigation and pass appropriate orders thereon within a month from the date of communication of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the revision petition is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties as early as possible.
(Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 2 3 3 4 4