Partly allowed

Sanjit Rajak v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Calcutta HC9 Mar 2021WPA/17360/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court heard a writ petition concerning the missing son of the petitioner. The Court noted police registration of the case but declined to direct CBI, holding existing investigation should proceed with vigor. A final report was ordered within six months.

What did the court decide?

Directed existing police investigation to be carried out with vigil and vigor; final report to be filed within six months.

Sanjit Rajak Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

09.03. 2021

¶2

Item no. 06 Aloke/AP

¶3

(Through Video Conference)

¶4

WPA 17360 of 2018

¶5

Shree Sanjit Rajak Vs.

¶6

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶7

Mr. Anil Kumar Chattopadhyay, Adv. … For the Petitioner Mr. Rana Mukherjee, APP Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwal, adv. … For the State

¶8

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶9

The complaint of the petitioner is that his son, Akash Rajak, is missing from sometime in 2017 and that there is inadequate response by the police in spite of a complaint. We see from the material papers including the report of the police that the petitioner had named few persons who had allegedly threatened to do away with Akash Rajak.

¶10

The police investigation has disclosed through the different reports show, inter alia, that they have a definite version of Akash Rajak, being involved with a female who in turn apparently, allegedly, is also maintaining certain relationship with another person or other persons. The police has registered a complaint as Sankrail P.S. Case No. 838 of 2018 dated 27.11.2018 under Sections 363/365/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sub-Inspector Dibakar Mondal has been entrusted with the case for investigation.

¶11

The fact that investigation proceeding in that case is part of the contents of the report submitted to this Court by Tanmoy Bhattacherjee, Officer-in-

¶12

¶13

Charge, Sankrail P.S. on 29.11.2018. We do not see why that investigation should linger.

¶14

Merely because the petitioner’s son yet to be traced, we are not inclined to think that this is a fit case where this Court, in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation or any other special agency to carry forward the course of investigation either by registering of a fresh case or otherwise. For the ends of justice the investigation stated to be carried on with requisite vigil and vigor on the basis of the aforenoted police case and a final report in that regard shall be filed before the jurisdictional criminal court within a period of six months from now.

¶15

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

¶16

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of without prejudice to the contentions of any other persons in any proceedings that have already been started or may be started at any point of time in relation to the instant case.

¶17

[Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, C.J]

¶18

[Aniruddha Roy, J.]

Sanjit Rajak v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjit Rajak v. State of West Bengal & Ors.

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

Ranno Devi Isai Alias Ranno Devi Esai Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Ganga Sagar Ram Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Swaraswati Panja Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Madhab Das Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Manju Sharma Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Tumpa Pandit Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.