20.01.2025 Item No. 1014. Court No.29. AB W.P.A. (H) 31 of 2023 Lakshmi Mondal Vs The State of West Bengal & Others Mr. Dhruba Mukherjee, Mr. Asraf Mondal .…for the Petitioner. Mr. Rana Mukherjee, ld. APP Mr. Simanta Kabir ….for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. From the reports filed by the State, we see that the deadbody in question was identified by the petitioner’s brother as that of the petitioner’s son. Photograph of the deadbody was shown to the petitioner, who identified the same as her son. The deadbody was also identified by the mobile phone that was recovered from the pocket of the deadbody. 2. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner’s son is missing anymore. It is unfortunate, but the fact is that he is no more. His deadbody has been identified. The post mortem report says that the cause of death is the effects of drowning, ante mortem in nature. 3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner says that DNA test was conducted but was not matched with that of the deadbody. Signed By : APURBA BANDYOPADHYAY High Court of Calcutta 22 nd of January 2025 12:31:42 PM 2 4. Learned Advocate for the State says that the deadbody was found to be highly decomposed. Therefore, DNA profile could not be created. 5. Learned Advocate for the petitioner says that the petitioner’s son, the deceased, was the only earning member of the family. He was on-duty in the Police Department. He refers to a compensation scheme framed by the Government of West Bengal, Home (Police) Department and says that the petitioner should be granted benefit under that scheme. 6. In the present writ application, we cannot pass any such direction. However, the petitioner will be at liberty to make appropriate representation before the Competent Authority in accordance with law. 7. WPA (H) 31 of 2023 is, accordingly, disposed of. 8. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)