Allowed

Kasem Ali Mondal and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC19 Mar 2021CRR/853/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application sought expeditious disposal of proceedings under Sections 406 and 498A IPC where the charge sheet was submitted in 2010 with significant delays. The court directed the Trial Court to set a hearing date in June 2021 and decide the framing of charges promptly to ensure a speedy trial.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Trial Court to pre-pone the next hearing date to any date in June 2021 and decide the framing of charges on that date or within a fortnight, followed by expeditious conclusion of the proc

Kasem Ali Mondal and Ors. Vs State of West… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

19.03.2021 5 SB Ct. No.32

¶2

CRR 853 of 2021

¶3

In the matter of : Kasem Ali Mondal & Ors.

¶4

Mr. A. Chakraborty Mr. S. S. Saha … for the Petitioners Mr. Imran Ali Ms. Debjani Sahu …. for the State

¶5

This is an application seeking an expeditious disposal of a proceeding in which the charge sheet was submitted under Sections 406 and 498A of the Penal Code.

¶6

Let a copy be served upon Mr. Imran Ali and Ms. Debjani Sahu learned counsels who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. They are requested to appear in this matter. Their engagement may be regularised by the competent authority of the State in due course.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners are the accused in this case. Although the F.I.R. and the Charge Sheet were submitted as far back as in 2010, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. Long dates are being fixed, practically one day per year. Till date even charges could not be framed. On 13.06.2020 the next date was fixed on 06.05.2022. The proceeding has remained pending largely, for no fault on the part of the petitioners.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that fixing of such long dates cannot be sustained in the eye of law.

¶9

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels for the petitioners and the State and have perused the revision petition.

¶10

¶11

No prejudice would be caused to any one if a direction is passed for an expeditious disposal of the case.

¶12

It appears that an inordinate delay was occasioned in concluding the present proceeding.

¶13

In any event, fixing dates nearly after two years, as on the last occasion, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. This is completely anti-thetic to the right of the accused to a speedy trial.

¶14

In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the learned Trial Court is directed to pre-pone the next date for hearing to any date in the month of June 2021 and decide the question of framing of charge on that date or with in a fortnight from then and thereafter expeditiously conclude the proceeding without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties.

¶15

With these observations, the revision petition is disposed of.

¶16

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.

¶17

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Kasem Ali Mondal and Ors. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasem Ali Mondal 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

Habibur Molla @ Habibur Rahaman Molla Vs State of West Bengal

Tarikul Shak @ Tarikul Shekh Vs State of West Bengal

Harimohan Mondal @ Harimohan Mandal @ Mohan Vs State of West Bengal

Asit Mahato & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Solar Designs Pvt.Ltd. and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Swapna Mahato and Others Vs State of West Bengal