Dismissed¶35

Sisir Saha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC14 Jan 2025CRR/184/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing / criminal revision; Section 156(3) CrPC application; Section 154 CrPC compliance; Priyanka Srivastava (2015) 6 SCC 287; Section 482 CrPC; Ramveer Upadhyay SLP (CRL.) No. 2953 of 2022; prima facie case; injury report, several injuries; iron rod assault, strangulation, snatching of gold chain; land dispute; Serampore PS case no.607 of 2023; GR case no.3205 of 2023; Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore, Hooghly; IPC Sections 323, 307, 379, 120B, 34; CRR 184 of 2024 dismissed; interim order vacated; trial to proceed; Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.; judgment dated 14.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

The mandatory provision of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. has prima facie been duly complied with by the complainant / opposite party no.2, as appears from paragraphs 4 and 5 of the application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. ¶25

Sisir Saha and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Cheating and Forgery | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceeding GR case no.3205 of 2023 arising out of Serampore PS case no.607 of 2023 (Sections 323, 307, 379, 120B read with Section 34 IPC) should be quashed in favour of the petitioners. +1 more

¶9

Court's answer

The injury report at page 24 of the case diary shows the injury is simple in nature but there are several injuries sustained by the complainant Asgar Ali.

¶29

Ratio / Principle

¶25

Key takeaways

Though the incident revolves around a land dispute, the injury report makes out a prima facie case in respect of the offences alleged against the petitioners and the present case should be permitted to proceed towards trial.ratio¶30
Interfering in such a prosecution would amount to abuse of process of law.ratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court, Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) — Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), CRR 184 of 2024 (assigned matter), judgment dated 14.01.2025 (hearing concluded 09.12.2024). Revisional application by Sisir Saha & Ors. praying quashing of the entire proceeding GR case no.3205 of 2023 arising out of Serampore PS case no.607 of 2023 dated 18.12.2023 (Sections 323, 307, 379, 120B read with Section 34 IPC) pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore, Hooghly, arising from a Section 156(3) application alleging a 22.11.2023 joint attack with iron rods, strangulation and snatching of a gold chain near Khatir Bazar, Rishra, in a land-dispute background. Petitioners pleaded false implication and non-compliance with Section 154 CrPC, invoking Priyanka Srivastava ((2015) 6 SCC 287). The Public Prosecutor showed prima facie compliance with Section 154 (paragraphs 4–5 of the 156(3) application) and placed the case-diary injury report (page 24) showing several injuries to complainant Asgar Ali. Adopting the Supreme Court's view in Ramveer Upadhyay (SLP (CRL.) No. 2953 of 2022) that criminal proceedings cannot be nipped in the bud under Section 482 CrPC, the Court held that interfering in such a prosecution would amount to abuse of process of law, found a prima facie case, and dismissed CRR 184 of 2024, directing the Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law; interim orders stood vacated and connected applications were disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction APPELLATE SIDE

¶2

Present:

¶3

The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)

¶4

CRR 184 of 2024 (Assigned Matter)

¶5

Sisir Saha & Ors. Vs.

¶6

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

¶7

For the Petitioners	:Mr. Mr. Ms. Mr. Ms.	Pawan Kumar Gupta, Antarikhya Basu, Sofia Nesar, Sayan Mukherjee, Madhumita Basak.
For the State	: Mr. Mr. Ms.	Debasish Roy, Ld. P.P. Bitasok Banerjee, Suvashree Patel.
For the Opposite Party No. 2	: Mr. Mr.	Prosenjit Mukherjee, Samrat Banerjee.
Hearing concluded on	:09.	12.2024
Judgment on	:14.	01.2025

¶8

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J. :

¶9

1. The present revisional application has been preferred praying for quashing of the entire proceeding being GR case no.3205 of 2023 arising out of Serampore PS case no.607 of 2023 dated

¶10

Page 2

¶11

18.12.2023 under Sections 323, 307, 379 and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore, Hooghly.

¶12

2. The allegations made in the application under Section 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code filed before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore against the petitioners herein are as follows:-

¶13

“2……complainant purchased a piece of land measuring about 01 katha, 03 chittak, 23 Sft, under Mouza Mahesh, J.L. No.15, comprised in C.S. and R.S. Dag No.1782 and 1783, which is located beside Ramkrishna Road under P.O.-Mahesh, P.S.Serampore, which is within the ambit of Ward No.24, of Serampore Municipality, under A.D.S.R. Serampore which was duly registered before Additional Registrar of Assurance – III, Kolkata on 31.10.2014 and which was recorded in Book No.I, CD Volume No.9, Pages from 5890 to 5913, being No.03947 for the year 2014.

¶14

3…..complainant purchased the afore property from Subedar Khan, S/o Late Salamat Khan, of 41, Bansbagan, P.O.-Kamarhati, PS – Belgharia, Dist. – North 24 Parganas, Kolkata – 700058 and Mastu Mia, S/o Late Salamat Khan, of 18/2, Dasu Babur Bagan, P.O. – Kamarhati, PS – Belgharia, Dist. North 24 Parganas, Kolkata – 700058, through their Constituted Attorneys namely (1) Wakil Ahamed,

¶15

Page 3

¶16

S/o Sher Mohamad, residing at 11/R, P.K. Das Lane, P.O.-Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist- Hooghly (2) Mohammad Shamim Anwar, S/o Late Gulam Ahmad, residing at 27/A, P. K. Das Lane, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly and (3) Mohammad Nayeem, S/o Late Inayat Ali, residing at 47/A, Ramkrishna Road, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly. Subsequently your complainant came to know that the persons namely Subedar Khan, Wakil Ahamad and Md. Shamim Anwar was arrested in connection with Serampore PS Case 53/2023 dated 08.02.2023, under section 420/467/468/409/120B/34 IPC for fraudulently sell of property through fraudulent power of attorney. That your complainant went to Serampore police station in this regard to lodge a complaint but the Investigating Officer of the aforesaid case incorporated his name as witness and your complainant gave statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate, Serampore.

¶17

4. That on 22.11.2023 at about 10.20 AM, when your complainant went to the grocery shop near Khatir Bazar, Rishra the Accused persons namely, 1) Sisir Saha, S/o Late M. N. Saha, residing at 30/A, P.K. Das Lane, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin – 712248, 2) Imtiyaz Ahamed, S/o late Muntaz Ahamed, residing at 13/A, P.K.Das Lane, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin – 712248, 3) Md. Jamir, S/o Late Md. Habib, residing at 47/F, Ramkrishna Road, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin -712248, 4) Mustafa Khan @ Binod, S/o Late Kazim Khan,

¶18

Page 4

¶19

residing at 37/2, Ram Krishna Road, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin – 712248, 5) Md. Aftab Alam, S/o Md. Nizamuddin residing at 12/A, Ram Krishna Road, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin 712248, 6) Md. Ashraf, S/o Late Md. Mustaqim, residing at 61/D, Ram Krishna Road, PO – Rishra, PS – Serampore, Dist. – Hooghly, Pin – 712248 and 7) Pankaj Jha, S/o Shiv Shankar Jha, residing at 1/A, Rai Land Road, PO – Mahesh, PS – Serampore, Dist. Hooghly, Pin – 712202, suddenly attacked your complainant jointly with iron rod and assaulted him. Imtiyaz Ahamed and Sisir Saha choked the neck of your complainant by strangulation from his back side and Md. Jamir, Mustafa Khan @ Binod and Md. Aftab Alam assaulted your complainant with iron rods with intention to kill him. By such sudden attack your complainant fell down on the ground and taking advantage of the situation Md. Ashraf and Pankaj Jha snatched away his gold chain of 01 Bhori from your complainant’s neck. That by the intervention of the local people your complainant somehow saved his life and all the accused persons fled away by giving threat if your complainant go to Court or police station his life will be under threat. Subsequently your complainant went to the Serampore Walsh Sub-Divisional Hospital along with his family member for treatment and treated there. Thereafter your complainant went to Serampore Police Station several times for taking necessary legal action against the accused persons but till

¶20

Page 5

¶21

today no action has been taken against the accused persons.”

¶22

3. The petitioners’ case is that they have been falsely implicated in the present case and they are mere witnesses to the said transaction and there is no prima facie case as alleged by the complainant against them.

¶23

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the present case was initiated on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the mandatory provision of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. has not been complied with by the complainant and he has relied upon the judgment of

¶24

Priyanka Srivastava & Anr. vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., (2015) 6 SCC 287. As such, the order registering the FIR on the direction of the Magistrate is not in accordance with law and the FIR against the present petitioners is to be quashed.

¶25

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has brought notice of this Court to paragraphs 4 and 5 of the application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. wherein it prima facie appears that the mandatory provision of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. has been duly complied with by the complainant / opposite party no.2.

¶26

6. Learned Public Prosecutor on placing the case diary has relied upon the injury report at Page 24 of the case diary wherein it

¶27

Page 6

¶28

appears that the injury is simple in nature but there are

¶29

several injuries sustained by the complainant Asgar Ali.

¶30

7. The incident in this case though revolves around a land dispute, there being an injury report in this case with injuries therein, making out a prima facie case in respect of the offences alleged against the petitioners herein, the present case should be permitted to proceed towards trial.

¶31

8. In Ramveer Upadhyay & Anr. Vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No. 2953 of 2022, decided on April 20, 2022, the Supreme Court held:-

¶32

“ 39. In our considered opinion criminal proceedings cannot be nipped in the bud by exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. only because the complaint has been lodged by a political rival. It is possible that a false complaint may have been lodged at the behest of a political opponent. However, such possibility would not justify interference under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings. As observed above, the possibility of retaliation on the part of the petitioners by the acts alleged, after closure of the earlier criminal case cannot be ruled out. The allegations in the complaint constitute offence under the Attrocities Act. Whether the allegations are true or untrue, would have to be decided in the trial. In exercise of power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the Court does not examine the correctness of the allegations in a complaint except in exceptionally rare cases where it is patently clear that the allegations are frivolous or do not disclose any offence .”

¶33

9. Interfering in such a prosecution would amount to abuse of

¶34

process of law.

¶35

10. CRR 184 of 2024 is thus dismissed.

¶36

Page 7

¶37

11. Trial Court to proceed in accordance with law.

¶38

12. All connected Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶39

13. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

¶40

14. Copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Trial Court for necessary compliance.

¶41

15. Urgent certified website copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all, necessary legal formalities.

¶42

[Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.]

Sisir Saha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sisir Saha and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoranjan Naskar Vs State of West Bengal& Ors.

Chitra Das Vs Gautam Shroff@ Gautam Roy Govind Shroff & Anr.

Rexona Khatun Bibi Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Saswati Moulick & Anr. Vs Rajpur - Sonarpur Municipality & Ors.

Swapan Chowdhury Vs Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Amit Prakash Agarwal Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.