Allowed

Koushik Wadder @ Bappa v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC12 Feb 2021CRR/357/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed the applicant's revision application seeking expedited disposal of a trial pending since custody began in 2020, directing the trial court to frame charges without unnecessary adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously and decide framing of charges on 18.02.2021 or within seven days thereafter.

Koushik Wadder @ Bappa Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. 32 Item 107 ssi 12.02. 2021

¶2

C.R.R. 357 of 2021

¶3

In the matter of:- Koushik Wadder @ Bappa

¶4

Mr. Sudip Ghosh Chowdhury Mr. Argha Das Mr. Abhishek Bose

¶5

…for the petitioner

¶6

Mr. Bidyut Kr. Roy Mr. Pratik Bose ….for the State

¶7

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Section 21 (c) of the NDPS Act.

¶8

Let a copy of the application be served upon Mr. Bidyut Kr. Roy and Mr. Pratik Bose, learned advocates, who are present in court today and who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. Their engagement may be regularised in due course by the competent authority of the State.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is in custody in connection with the present case since 06.03.2020. Although the impugned proceeding was initiated in March, 2020 and a charge sheet was submitted thereafter, till date, the proceeding could not be concluded. The impugned proceeding has remained pending for no fault of the present petitioner. The next

¶10

¶11

date has been fixed on 18.02.2021 for framing of charges.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it will be in the interest of justice if a direction is passed to expedite the proceeding.

¶13

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition.

¶14

No prejudice will be caused to any one, if a direction is passed for expediting the proceeding.

¶15

It does not appear that a delay has been occasioned in this case as such. However, the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2020.

¶16

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I request the learned trial Court to conclude the proceeding as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties and in particular, to decide the question of framing of charges on the next date fixed for hearing i.e. on 18.02.2021 or within seven days thereafter.

¶17

With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of.

¶18

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities.

¶19

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Koushik Wadder @ Bappa v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koushik Wadder @ Bappa v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chadera @ Chandera Bibi Sekh Vs State of West Bengal

Fantush Shaw @ Shyam Kr. Shaw and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Jasimuddin Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Subhapriya Majumder Vs State of West Bengal

Mostakin Molla @ Mostaqin Molla @ Raju and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Soumen Saha @ Babusona Vs State of West Bengal