Dismissed

M.George Frahor and Ors. v. Nupur Mukherjee and Anr.

Calcutta HC11 Feb 2022CRR/1790/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Calcutta dismissed a criminal revisional application on the grounds that a co-ordinate Bench had recently passed a trial completion direction, making the prayer against settlement premature.

What did the court decide?

The revisional application was dismissed; liberty granted to file a fresh application challenging the order regarding the return of seized property.

M.George Frahor and Ors. Vs Nupur Mukherjee and Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

11-02-2022 Subha

¶2

Item no. 14 Ct no.34

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction (Via video-conference)

¶4

C.R.R 1790 of 2020 with CRAN 1 of 2020 With CRAN 2 of 2021 With CRAN 3 of 2022

¶5

In Re : An application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶6

In the matter of : M. George Frabor & Ors. ……Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Rajeev Lochan C ….for the petitioners.

¶8

Mr. S. G. Mukherjee, ld. PP Mr. Madhusudan Sur, ld. APP, Mr. Manoranjan Maiti ..for the State.

¶9

Mr. Saikat Basu

¶10

…for the pvt. O. P. No.2/de facto complainant.

¶11

Mr. Sur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has submitted a report. The said report encloses an order passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this court in CRM(SB)/14/2022 , wherein it has been specifically observed “The prosecution is directed to complete the trial of the case by 15^th June, 2022”. Let the status report along with other connected documents be kept with the record.

¶12

Mr. Rajeev Lochan, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners emphasized on the factum of settlement taking place

¶13

¶14

between the complainant and the petitioners.

¶15

In view of the said order in respect of CRM (SB)/14/2022 which has been passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this court, I am of the opinion that the prayer so advanced cannot be acceded to as very recently within a close proximity of time, a co-ordinate Bench of this court has passed a direction upon the trial court.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, the revisional application being CRR 1790 of 2020 is dismissed.

¶17

Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 1/de facto complainant will be at liberty to take out an appropriate fresh application challenging the order passed by the learned Magistrate in respect of the return of the seized property.

¶18

Pursuant to the earlier order dated 3^rd February, 2022 passed by this court, a report dated 9^th February, 2022 has been filed by the learned Registrar(Judicial Service), High Court, Calcutta before this court. Let the same be kept with record.

¶19

Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

¶20

All pending applications, if any, in connection with the revisional application, are consequently disposed of.

¶21

All concerned parties are to act in terms of a copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.

¶22

[Tirthankar Ghosh, J]

¶23

M.George Frahor and Ors. v. Nupur Mukherjee and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.George Frahor and Ors. v. Nupur Mukherjee and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munmun Ghosh & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Piyali Banerjee Vs Kalyani Banerjee

Kangaleswar Mondal & Ors. Vs Paban Sardar & Anr.

Sanjay Kr Kedia Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Sanjay Kr Kedia Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Sanjay Kr Kedia Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.