Anand Bhagat Vs the State of West Bengal

The reasons so assigned in the application for condonation of delay are found to be just and sufficient. Accordingly, delay is condoned. The application being CRAN 1 of 2025 is, thus, allowed.

¶12

Re: CRR 145 of 2025

¶13

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has prayed for defreezing of the account. According to the learned advocate, the investigation commenced in the year 2022 and since then, the same is continuing and the bank account of the petitioner has been frozen in connection with the present case being Matigara P.S. Case No. 995 of 2022. Learned advocate submits that there are no accusations of proceeds of crime being available in the account concerned and in spite of

¶14

2

¶15

the same, petitioner is subjected to harassment because he cannot utilize the amount in his account which is a fetter on his livelihood including his business.

¶16

Learned advocate appearing for the State has submitted a report which reflects that investigation revealed transaction of Rs.1,56,46,760.11 only being received in between the period from 21.09.2019 to 10.09.2022. The said transactions were majorly in U.S. Dollars and mainly from three accounts of the present petitioner and another three accounts of an accused. The investigating agency also claims that they have sent communication through the Government of India and to that effect, the request number which has been sent under the Treaty has been mentioned for both the countries being USA and Canada.

¶17

Learned advocate for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to paragraph 2(iii) of the revisional application wherein the bank accounts have been referred being IDBI Bank Account No. 0182102000023904, ICICI Bank Account No. 333201502868 and Bandhan Bank Account No. 50180010936088.

¶18

The report which has been submitted by the investigating authority reflects that all these three accounts are thickly connected with the accusations which have been made and for which the authorities are waiting from the Secretary, Government of India. Having considered the fact that the investigation is still in progress and prima facie the investigating agency is unable to progress because of reasons

¶19

3

¶20

beyond their control, at this stage, I am not inclined to accede to the prayer of the petitioner.

¶21

Accordingly, the revisional application being CRR 145 of 2025 is dismissed.

¶22

However, the Secretary, Government of India would send necessary reminders to expedite the process for information from the appropriate authorities which has already been sent and reference is available with the investigating agency.

¶23

Let this order be communicated to the concerned Secretary of the Government of India by the investigating officer of the case preferably within a period of seven days from date.

¶24

The confidential report submitted on behalf of the State is returned to the learned advocate appearing for the State.

¶25

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

¶26

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶27

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Anand Bhagat v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Bhagat v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Prasad Sah Vs the State of West Bengal

Kunal Sah and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Tushta Sarkar and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Sagram Hemram@Shegram Hemram@Hembram and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal

Kush Mandal Vs the State of West Bengal

Md.Mobarak Vs the State of West Bengal