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 0, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Indrani Chakraborty vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 21 March, 2014

Author: Dipankar Datta

Bench: Dipankar Datta

                     1




21.03.2014               W.P. 7378 (W) of 2014

                         Indrani Chakraborty
                                  v.
                     State of West Bengal & ors.
                                 With

                         W.P. 7596 (W) of 2014

                         Ansar Ali & ors.
                             v.
              The Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate
                   North 24-Parganas - 700124

                 Mr. Kishore Datta
                 Ms. Sumita Shaw
                            ........for the petitioner
                              in W.P. 7378(W)/14
                 Mr. Amitesh Banerjee
                 Mrs. Munmum Tewary
                             ........for the State
                              in W.P. 7378(W)/14

                 Mr. Debobrata Saha Roy
                 Mr. Rajesh Upadhyay

                     ......for the respondent no. 6

in W.P. 7378 (W)/14 Mr. Sandipan Ganguly Mr. Arijit Ghosh .....for respondent no. 7 in W.P. 7378 (W)/14 Mr. Phiroze Edulji .........for the petitioner in W.P. 7596(W)/14 Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar ......for the State in W.P. 7596(W)/14

1. An order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barasat is under challenge in W.P. 7378 (W) of 2014, whereas the subject matter of challenge in W.P. 7596 (W) of 2014 2 is an order passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bench II, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta. Since the question as to whether a writ petition which is directed against an order passed by the criminal court in exercise of judicial functions would be maintainable is the common preliminary issue involved in these two writ petitions, the same are being heard together.

2. Mr. Datta, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner in W.P. 7378 (W) of 2014 has commenced his arguments. Due to paucity of time, he could not conclude today.

3. Put up the writ petitions on Monday next, to be taken up in my chamber at 4.30 pm.

4. The writ petitions are heard in part.

(DIPANKAR DATTA, J.) 3