Disposed

Hasibul Islam@Harshibul Islam and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC15 Mar 2021CRR/644/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Revisional application seeking expeditious disposal of criminal proceedings where accused languished in custody. High Court directed trial court to conclude proceedings without unnecessary adjournment and decide framing of charge at earliest opportunity.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Trial Court to conclude the proceeding expeditiously without unnecessary adjournments and decide the framing of charge at the earliest.

Hasibul Islam@Harshibul Islam and Ors. Vs State of West… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2021)

144 15.03.2021 NB

CRR 644 of 2021

Ct. No. 32

In the matter of:- Hasibul Islam @ Harshibul Islam & Ors. …petitioners

¶5

Ms. Minoti Gomes, Mr. J. I. Hossain. …for the petitioners.

¶6

Mr. Prasun Kumar Datta, Mr. Pratick Bose. …for the State.

¶7

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Sections 21(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Sections 186, 286, 353, 379 and 411 of the Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶8

Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Prasun Kumar Datta and Mr. Pratick Bose, learned Counsels who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State and who are present in Court today. Their engagement may be regularised by the competent authority of the State in due course.

¶9

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are the accused in this case. Although the case was started in January, 2020 and the supplementary charge sheet was submitted on 13.07.2020, till date the proceeding has not been concluded. Long dates are being fixed. The petitioners are languishing in custody since the date of arrest i.e. since 22.01.2020. There are about eleven prosecution witnesses mentioned in the charge sheet. 27.04.2021 has been fixed as the next date of framing of charge.

¶10

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that it would be in the interest of justice if the impugned proceeding is expedited.

¶11

I have heard the submissions of the learned Counsels appearing

¶12

¶13

on behalf of the petitioners and the State and have perused the revision petition.

¶14

Regardless of whoever may be actually responsible, it appears that some delay was occasioned in concluding the impugned proceeding, especially considering the fact that the petitioners are in custody since long.

¶15

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 charge at the earliest, preferably on the next date fixed for hearing or within a fortnight from then.

¶16

With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

¶17

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Hasibul Islam@Harshibul Islam and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hasibul Islam@Harshibul Islam and Ors. 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

Kalyan Krishna Nandi Vs Nita Nandi ( Mani) & Anr.

Kalyan Krishna Nandi Vs Nita Nandi ( Mani) & Anr.

Alamgir Molla Vs State of West Bengal

Vikrant Wadhwa Vs State of West Bengal and Another

Sudeb Mondal @ Sedeb Mandol Vs State of West Bengal

Mahamadul Hassan Vs State of West Bengal