The High Court disposed of a revisional application challenging an order by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate regarding CCTV camera removal. The Court held that such disputes are purely civil in nature and found insufficient ground to interfere after a lapse of over a year.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
01-12-2022 Subha Item no.14 Ct no.34
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
CRR 360 of 2021
Minakshi Mandal & Anr. -versus-
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Re : An application under Section 482 read with Section 397 of the Cr.P.C.
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy Ms. Manisha Sharma ….for the State.
The revisional application was preferred for setting aside of the order dated 26.05.2020 and for quashing of the proceedings initiated by the Officer-in-charge, Bidhannagar Women Police Station in connection with Bidhannagar Women P.S. G.D.E No. 16 of 2020 dated 05.05.2020 and Techno City P. S. G.D.E no. 60 of 2020 dated 04.05.2020.
The record reflects that the prayer which was advanced before the court was for removal of the CCTV camera which was situated between the flat no. 1201 and flat no. 1202 of the given address. The learned A. C. J. M., Bidhannagar, North 24 Parganas also granted permission to the said effect.
The revisional application was admitted on 11th February, 2021 and the impugned order was stayed for a period of four weeks.
Installation of CCTV camera or removal of the same is purely domain of the civil court. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bidhannagar, North 24 Parganas should not have
2
interfered with such prayer of the Police Officers on the basis of a G.D. entry. Utmost, the Executive Magistrate of the concerned jurisdiction could have passed an order. There has been a lapse of almost one and half years in the meantime and the issue involved over here relate to regular amenities within a complex.
No information has been furnished before this court regarding the present stage of the order, whether the same has been implemented or not as there was only a limited stay granted by this court.
Having regard to the time period, which has elapsed in the meantime, I do not find that it would be fit and proper for this court to interfere in the changed circumstances.
With the aforesaid observations, the present revisional application being CRR 360 of 2021 is disposed of.
Pending applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.
All concerned parties are to act in terms of a copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this court.
[Tirthankar Ghosh, J]
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court should interfere in the disposal of an application regarding CCTV installation after a lapse of over a year.
Whether an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate had jurisdiction to interfere with police prayer regarding CCTV removal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Minakshi Mandal & Anr.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Tirthankar Ghosh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
