Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 54255 (CAL)

MD.NASIR@SAHIL v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRM(DB)/721/2024 · 2025-01-03

Apurba Sinha Ray, Harish Tandon

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

P a g e | 1 1203 2025 WEDNESDAY COURT : 01 ITEM : 01 MATTER : 439 STATUS : CORRECTION BENCH ID : 1482 AR COURT : NANDY CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM (DB) 721 of 2024 In Re:- An application for Bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on December 17, 2024 in connection with Siliguri Women Police Station Case No. 85 of 2024 dated 30.07.2024 under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 read with Sections 417/313/325/420/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. (Special POCSO Case No. 74 of 2024) And In the matter of: MD. NASIR @ SAHIL ......PETITIONER MR. NILAY CHAKRABORTY, LD. APP …...for the State 1. This matter has come up in the list at the instance of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the State, for correction of the order dated 10.03.2025 wherein the following mistakes have cropped up:- i) The surname of Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate, for the State, has been wrongly recorded as ‘Bhattacharya’ instead of ‘Bhattacharjee’. ii) The name of Mr. Dhiman Sil, learned Advocate, who also appeared on behalf of the State, has been wrongly typed as ‘Dhimal’ instead of ‘Dhiman’. iii) The designation of Mr. Nilay Chakraborty, learned Advocate, who also appeared for the State should be shown as ‘Learned APP’ instead of ‘Advocate’. iv) The item no. of the case has been shown as ‘03’ instead of ‘02’. 2. Such mistakes being apparent and ministerial in nature, Office is directed to correct such mistakes, wherever necessary, as pointed out above. 3. This order may be read conjointly with the order dated 10.03.2025. (HARISH TANDON, J) (APURBA SINHA RAY, J)