15.07.2026 Sl. No.12 Ct. No.237 S.A. CRR 356 of 2026 Lakshmi Kanta Kar -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya Mr. Anirban Datta Mr. Debabrata Das Mr. Saptarshi Mukherjee Mr. Pratik Acharjee …for the petitioner Mr. Sayan Mukherjee Mr. Sayan Das Mr. Anirban Roy …for O.P. Nos.2 & 3 Mr. Subir Ganguly Mr. Sandeep Prasad Shaw …for the State The petitioner challenges the order dated January 14, 2026, passed by the Learned Judge, 3rd Special Court at Barasat, in Special Case No. 24 of 2025, whereby the Learned Judge allowed the prayer of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 for defreezing the bank accounts belonging to them. It appears that opposite party nos. 2 and 3 filed an application before the Learned Judge on October 28, 2025, seeking defreezing of the said bank accounts. The application was taken up for hearing on December 15, 2025. By an order passed on that date, the Learned Special Judge disposed of the application, granting liberty to the applicants to file a comprehensive application with better particulars seeking the same relief. The Learned Judge also called upon the Investigating Officer to furnish clarification regarding the said bank accounts. It further appears that on January 14, 2026, opposite party nos. 2 and 3 filed a fresh application seeking defreezing of the relevant 2 bank accounts. By an order passed on the same date, the Learned Judge disposed of the application by allowing not only the fresh application dated January 14, 2026, but also the earlier application dated October 28, 2025. It has been submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner that the application filed on January 14, 2026, was not served upon the petitioner. It is further submitted that the Learned Judge could not have disposed of the application dated October 28, 2025, as the same had already been disposed of by the order dated December 15, 2025. The learned advocate appearing for opposite party nos. 2 and 3, however, has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated January 14, 2026, to contend that a copy of the application filed on the said date had, in fact, been served upon the learned advocate for the petitioner. Upon perusal of the records, I find that a copy of the second application filed by opposite party nos. 2 and 3 was served upon the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner in Court on the very same date. Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya, learned advocate, led by Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was not afforded sufficient time to respond to the application filed by opposite party nos. 2 and 3, thereby resulting in a violation of the principles of natural justice. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the petitioner ought to be afforded a 3 meaningful opportunity to respond to the application filed before the Learned Judge in the court below. Accordingly, this application is disposed of with the following directions: Since a copy of the application filed by opposite party nos. 2 and 3 has already been served upon the petitioner, the Learned Judge in the court below shall grant the petitioner an opportunity to file an objection to the said application within a period of seven days from the date of communication of this order. Thereafter, upon hearing all the parties, the Learned Judge shall decide the application for defreezing of the bank accounts filed on January 14, 2026, in accordance with law. It is further clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the case. The interference with the impugned order is confined solely to ensuring that the petitioner is afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Learned Judge shall dispose of the application within a period of one month from date without being influenced by any observations made in this order. The order dated January 14, 2026, is accordingly set aside. Accordingly, CRR 356 of 2026 is disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocates for the parties on usual undertakings. (Kausik Chanda, J.)