This court dismissed the revisional application as infructuous because the petitioner was acquitted by the trial court, rendering the revision without merit.
CRR 76 of 2019 dismissed as infructuous.
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.
01.7.2022 Court No.34 Sl. No. 28 SD
CRR 76 of 2019
In the matter of: Sri Kinjal Mitra ….Petitioner. Mr. Debasis Kar Mr. Arka Tilak Bhadra … for the Petitioner. Mr. P.K. Datta Mr. Santanu Deb Roy Md. Kutubuddin … for the State.
Status report submitted by the investigating officer be kept with the record.
It appears from the said report that the petitioner was found not guilty after conclusion of trial and he is acquitted under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure vide judgment dated April 8, 2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barrackpore, North 24-Parganas in G.R. Case No.4722 of 2018.
In view of the above, the present revisional application has become infructuous and as such, CRR 76 of 2019 is dismissed as infructuous.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revisional application is maintainable where the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial court.
Whether the present revision falls within the jurisdiction of this court given the acquittal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Kinjal Mitra
State
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
