Disposed
Sanghamitra Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Calcutta HCWPA/14241/2023
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
AD 285 Court No.14 SG WPA 14241 of 2023…
What the court decided
AI extract
AD 285 Court No.14 SG WPA 14241 of 2023…
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.
October 3, 2023 AD 285 Court No.14 SG
WPA 14241 of 2023
Sanghamitra Chatterjee vs. The State of West Bengal and others .
Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee Mr. Sandipan Das Mr. Badrul Karim Mr. Kiron Sk. Mr. Indranil Roy Mr. Dipankar Das Mr. Suman Sarkar … for the petitioner Mr. Debjit Mukherjee Mr. Kaustav Chatterjee … for the State Mr. Baidurya Ghoshal Mr. Amit Bikram Mahata
… for the respondent Nos.8-10
Mr. Suman Sengupta Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh … for the added respondent
Learned advocate for the intervenor submits that he is the de facto complainant in this case.
Upon hearing of the parties, the application for addition of party is allowed and the de facto complainant is added as a respondent.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an accused in Chatterjeehat Police Station Case No.110/22 dated 29.05.2022 under Sections 420/306 IPC. The investigating officer froze the salary account of the petitioner by misusing his power. The petitioner has prayed for defreezing her salary account
2
before the learned Magistrate, but the same is pending for the continuous absence of the investigating officer.
Learned counsel for the State relies on the report, which is taken on record and submits that the investigating officer shall be present before the Magistrate as and when required in respect of the application of the petitioner for defreezing her bank account.
In view of the above, no further order need be passed in this regard.
However, the learned Magistrate is requested to conclude the hearing of the application as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order.
If required, the investigating officer shall be present during hearing of the application.
As affidavits were not called for, the allegations made
are deemed not to have been admitted.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.
[ Jay Sengupta, J. ]
Sanghamitra Chatterjee
The State of West Bengal
Jay Sengupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court