Mousumi Mahanta v. the State of Assam and 11 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
In a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC and Article 227 Constitution, the Gauhati High Court reviewed a Special Court order accepting a final report and refusing cognizance against accused persons implicated in the victim's statement. The Court held the lower order was illegal.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order dated 26.02.2019 set aside and quashed; matter remanded to the learned Special Court to consider a fresh Police Report and pass a fresh order after hearing both parties within 15 days.
What the court decided
Page No.# 1/17
GAHC010071802019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./138/2019
MOUSUMI MAHANTA
D/O SRI UPEN MAHANTA, R/O SESAMUKH, PAHUKATA, P.S. AND DISTNAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782140
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 11 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:BIKRAMJIT DEY S/O RANJIT DEY R/A DIMORUGURI P.S.-NAGAON SADAR DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782140
3:RAJKUMAR DAS S/O LT. KASHIRAM DAS R/A DIMORUGURI P.S.-NAGAON SADAR DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782140
4:DIPAK DAS S/O LT. KASHIRAM DAS R/A DIMORUGURI P.S.-NAGAON SADAR DIST-NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782140
Page No.# 2/17
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Special Court erred in accepting the final report and refusing to take cognizance against private respondents implicated in the victim's statement without issuing a formal notice.
Whether the Special Court failed to appreciate the prima facie case against the private respondents despite the victim's statement implicating them.
Whether the impugned order suffered from manifest illegality and non-application of mind requiring interference under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mousumi Mahanta
- respondent
The State of Assam
- respondent
Bikramjit Dey
- respondent
Rajkumar Das
- respondent
Dipak Das
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Gauhati HC
- Decided on
- · September
- Registered
- Case no.
- Crl.Rev.P./138/2019
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court