The bench held that it was not in a position to invoke powers under Article 226. However, granting liberty to the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional criminal court to assess facts and consider directions under relevant BNSS sections.
Petitioners granted liberty to approach the jurisdictional criminal court.
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.
Sl.No. 6 08.11.2024 Court No. 35 G.S.Das
WPA 24734 of 2024
Gobinda Oraon & Anr. -Vs-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Anirban Mitra Mr. Amit Halder Mr. Amit Roy
… for the Petitioners
Mr. Rafiqul Islam Ms. Manika Sarkar … for the respondent nos. 4 to 8 Mr. Suman Sengupta Ms. Amrita Panja Moulick
… for the State-respondent
The petitioners are aggrieved by
the fact that their representation dated 10.08.2024 with the officer-in-charge of Sandeshkhali P.S. was not acted upon.
According to the petitioners, there were specific allegations of violence, physical force and injuries being inflicted at the behest of the private respondents.
Learned advocate for the State
has submitted a report.
2
According to the State, such
contention of physical assault could not be substantiated by the petitioners.
Learned advocate for the
respondent nos. 4 to 8 submits that allegedly there has been suppression of facts relating to the title and possession of the property.
According to the learned advocate for the private respondents, the petitioners’ case is not maintainable as there has been suppression of facts.
Be that as it may, the report reflects that the police authorities in order to prevent any breach of the peace and tranquility has drawn up proceedings under Section 126 of the BNSS.
Having considered the submissions
of the petitioners, State and the Private Respondents, I am of the opinion that this
3
court, on an assessment of the facts, is not in a position to invoke the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
However, since a litigant cannot
be prevented from approaching a court of law, I grant liberty to the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional criminal court. The jurisdictional criminal court would assess the facts, materials produced by the petitioners as a complainant and exercise its discretion as to whether directions are required to be passed under Section 175(3) of the BNSS or under Section 223 of the BNSS.
With the aforesaid observations, WPA 24734 of 2024 is disposed of.
Report so submitted be kept with
the record. A copy of the report be handed over to the learned advocates for
4
both the parties.
Affidavit of service so filed be
kept with the record.
Parties to act on a server copy
of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court,
Calcutta.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can invoke powers under Article 226 to pass directions under Sections 126, 175(3), and 223 of the BNSS in a case involving alleged physical violence.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to liberty to approach the jurisdictional criminal court as a complainant.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Gobinda Oraon & Anr.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Tirthankar Ghosh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
