Kumar Sahoo @ Ajoy Sahoo
Versus
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Navanil De
..... For the Petitioner.
Mr. Subrata Roy
..... For the State.
It is submitted ... Navanil De, learned advocate
appearing for the petitioner, that, due to inadvertence, the
description of the Police Station went wrong in the application
Justice Dipak Saha Ray
For the Appellant : Mr. Navanil De
For the State : Mr. Tanmoy Chowdhury
Heard on : 02.04.2013
C.A.V. on : 02.04.2013
Judgment
Vehicles Act.
And
In re : Ravindra Yadav @ Robi Yadav ... Petitioner.
Mr. Navanil De ... for the
Petitioner.
Mr. Antariksha Basu ... for the State
Kalam Mondal
v.
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Navanil De ....for the petitioner
Mr. Manjit Singh,PP
Mr. Pawan Kr. Gupta .. for the State
Shymal Deb .....for the appellant.
Mr. Manjit Singh, Public Prosecutor
Mr. Navanil De .....for the State.
Heard on : June
Evidence Act.
In the matter of: Swapan Kumar Saha .... petitioner.
Mr.Navanil De .. for the petitioner.
Mr.Debajyoti Deb .. for the State.
Heard the learned
Evidence Act.
In the matter of: Swapan Kumar Saha .... petitioner.
Mr.Navanil De .. for the petitioner.
Mr.Debajyoti Deb .. for the State.
Heard the learned
State of West Bengal -- Opposite Party
Mr. Subrata Bhattacharya
Mr. Navanil De ... for the appellant
Mr. Antariksha Basu ... for the State
Heard on : 18.9.2013
Judgment
West Bengal and another
Mr. Prabir Mitra
....for the petitioner
Mr. Navanil De
....for the Defacto complainant
Mr. Amartha Ghosh
...for the State
This
State of West Bengal
Opposite Party
Mr. Amal Krishna Samanta
Mr. Navanil De
For the Petitioners
Mr. Madhusudan Sur
For the State
The Petitioners, apprehending
