Disposed

Biswajit Biswas @ Bishu @ Kedar v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC10 Mar 2021CRR/709/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court passed a revision order regarding delay in trial proceedings under the NDPS Act. The court directed the Trial Court to conclude the proceeding expeditiously and decide the framing of charges at the earliest. The court linked the delay to the petitioner's custody since December 2019.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Trial Court to conclude the proceeding expeditiously and decide the framing of charges at the earliest without unnecessary adjournment.

Biswajit Biswas @ Bishu @ Kedar Vs State of West Bengal — Narcotics (NDPS) | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

134 10.03.2021 NB

¶2

CRR 709 of 2021

¶3

Ct. No. 32 In the matter of:- Biswajit Biswas @ Bishu @ Kedar …petitioner

¶4

Mr. Sudip Ghosh Chowdhury, Mr. Argha Das, Mr. Abhishek Bose. …for the petitioner. Mr. Prasun Kumar Datta, Mr. Santanu Deb Roy. …for the State.

¶5

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which a charge sheet was submitted under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substance Act.

¶6

Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Prasun Kumar Datta and Mr. Santanu Deb Roy, 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.

¶7

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf o the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is an accused in this case. The petitioner is in custody since the date of his arrest i.e. 29.12.2019. Although the case was started in December, 2019 and a charge sheet was submitted in June, 2020, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. Even charges could not be framed. There are about ten witnesses in this case and 21.05.2021 has been fixed as the next date for framing of charge.

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

¶11

It appears that some delay was occasioned in concluding the proceeding, especially considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 29.12.2019.

¶12

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 or within a fortnight therefrom.

¶13

With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of.

¶14

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.

¶15

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Biswajit Biswas @ Bishu @ Kedar v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswajit Biswas @ Bishu @ Kedar 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

Nasiruddin @Raju@Lama Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Kunal Jiwarajka and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Keshaav Chakrabarty @ Keshab Chakraborty Vs State of West Bengal

Palash Darani and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Sunil Laheri & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Mehanna Bewa @ Mehennagar Bibi Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.