IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE 19.06.2025 (ct. no.02) 87 Kausik CRR 209 of 2025 In the matter of : Mohammad Faruk Husen @ Faruk Hossain .... Petitioner. Mr. Anirban Banerjee …. For the petitioner. Mr. Nilay Chakraborty, Ld. APP Mr. Sagnik Sankar Sikdar …. For the State. Pursuant to the directions earlier passed a report has been submitted by the Inspector-in-Charge, Kotwali Police Station, Jalpaiguri. Clarification was sought for in respect of ‘Multiple lacunar infraction in left sided brain stem and right basal ganglia region’. Consequently, a report was obtained from Jalpaiguri Government Medical College and Hospital and to that effect it has been observed as follows :- “On the basis of the CT Scan findings, we are of the opinion that no traumatic injuries were found over the cranial bone and underlying brain tissue. Multiple lacunar infarcts were found in the left sided brain stem and right basal ganglia. The lacunar infarcts could be 2 caused by occlusion of vascular supply (small deep penetrating arteries of the brain), leading to tissue hypoxia and damage as a sequence of natural disease processes like chronic hypertension, diabetes, normal aging process, hypercholesterolemia, embolism, genetic factors, vasculitis etc. and these lacunar infarcts were not immediately related to the traumatic incidence of the subject. So it can be concluded that these lacunar infarcts were just an incidental finding related to co- existing medical conditions stated above and not a consequence to any immediate trauma-so the question of simple or grievous injury does not arise as per CT scan findings of the brain.” Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner was in hospital for about 5 days after the incident because of the injuries inflicted at his head. Having considered the submissions by the learned advocate for the petitioner and on assessment of the findings of the Medical Board of Jalpaiguri Government Medical College and Hospital, I am of the opinion that no injuries can be made out at this stage. However, in case, oral evidence is supported by other materials to substantiate the case of the petitioner in course of the trial, the learned Trial Court would be at liberty to add, alter or amend the charges. 3 With the aforesaid observations CRR 209 of 2025 is disposed of. Report so submitted be kept with the record. A copy of the report be handed over to the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner. All parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)