Allowed

Central Bureau of Investigation v. Kazi MD Tanbir

Calcutta HC11 Mar 2022CRR/88/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court set aside an order by the District and Sessions Judge rejecting a cancellation of bail application due to the State of West Bengal not being a party. The court held the State is not a necessary party as CBI is the investigating and prosecuting agency. The lower court was directed to issue notice and hear the application on merits.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 23.7.2019 rejecting the cancellation application is set aside. Notice is directed to be issued to parties for a hearing on merits.

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs Kazi MD Tanbir — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

11.03. 2022 item No.24 n.b. ct. no. 34

¶2

CRR 88 of 2020 IA No. CRAN 2 of 2020(Old No. CRAN 4201 of 2020)

¶3

Central Bereau of Investigation Vs.

¶4

Kazi Md. Tanbir

¶5

Mr. Anirban Mitra

¶6

…..for the Petitioner

¶7

Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, P.P., Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Ms. Debjani Sahu

¶8

…..for the State

¶9

Mr. Sarthak Burman,

¶10

Affidavit of service so filed be kept with the record.

¶11

Mr. Mitra, learned advocate appears on behalf of the

¶12

Central Bereau of Investigation.

¶13

Mr. Burman, learned advocate appears for the opposite party/accused.

¶14

Learned advocate for the petitioner/CBI draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 23.7.2019 passed by the Learned District and Sessions Judge, North 24 Parganas, wherein the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to observe that the application for cancellation was not maintainable as the State of West Bengal has not been made a party in Criminal Misc. case no.1753 of 2019. The investigation being carried out by CBI pursuant to an order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and is the Investigating Agency as well as the Prosecuting Agency. The

¶15

¶16

absence of State of West Bengal as a party in a cancellation of bail application cannot be a ground for rejecting the application preferred for cancellation.

¶17

The State of West Bengal is not even a necessary party in this case as they are neither the Investigating Agency nor the Prosecuting Agency. Accordingly, the order so passed is not sustainable in law and as such the same is set aside.

¶18

The learned Sessions Judge, North 24 Parganas is directed to issue notice upon the petitioner as well as the accused/opposite party and fix a date for hearing on the merits of the application for cancellation. It would be for the respective parties to contest regarding the maintainability and the application of laws relating to cancellation before the Learned Sessions Court.

¶19

Needless to state, this Court has not gone into the merits of the case. The learned Sessions Court would independently consider the application without being influenced by any observation made by this Court.

¶20

With the aforesaid observations, CRR 88 of 2020 is allowed.

¶21

All pending connected applications, if any, are consequently disposed of.

¶22

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

Central Bureau of Investigation v. Kazi MD Tanbir

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bureau of Investigation v. Kazi MD Tanbir

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

Azfar Hossain @ Milan Vs Rehana Parvin & Anr.

Sikha Paul Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Shib Ram Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Samir Majumder Vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Ajit Das@Ajit Kumar Das Vs State of West Bengal

Ajmiri Alam & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal