Disposed

Mahamadul Hassan v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC15 Mar 2021CRR/646/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this revisional application, the High Court observed the prolonged pendency of a drug case where the petitioner, an accused in custody since 2019, had not been tried to completion. The court directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings expeditiously within a year.

What did the court decide?

Directed the learned Trial Court to conclude the proceeding as expeditiously as possible within a period of one year from the next date of hearing.

Mahamadul Hassan Vs State of West Bengal — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

146 15.03.2021 NB

¶2

CRR 646 of 2021

¶3

In the matter of:- Mahamadul Hassan …petitioner

¶4

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

¶5

Mr. Bidyut Roy, Ms. Debjani Sahu. …for the State.

¶6

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

¶7

Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Bidyut Roy and Ms. Debjani Sahu, 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.

¶8

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is an accused in this case. He is in custody since the date of his arrest i.e. 06.01.2019. There are about eleven prosecution witnesses in this case as mentioned in the charge sheet. Although the FIR was registered in January, 2019 and charges were framed on 09.08.2019, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. The matter has remained pending for no fault of the present petitioner.

¶9

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that in the interest of justice, the impugned proceeding ought to be expedited.

¶10

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

¶11

It appears that some delay was occasioned in concluding the

¶12

¶13

proceeding, especially considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 06.01.2019.

¶14

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, preferably within a period of one year from the next date of hearing.

¶15

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.

¶16

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Mahamadul Hassan v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahamadul Hassan 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

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

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

Sudeb Mondal @ Sedeb Mandol Vs State of West Bengal