Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29859 (CAL)

SHIBSHANKAR BERA v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/16291/2026 · 2026-07-23

Saugata Bhattacharyya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

12 2233..0077..22002266 Ct. No. 05 adeb WPA 16291 of 2026 Shibshankar Bera Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta Ms. Sofia Nesar Mr. Santanu Sett Mr. Sharadindu Patra …for the petitioner Mr. Sayak Ranjan Ganguly Ms. Srijani Ghosh Ms. Simrin Hossain Mr. Pujal Musahib …for the respondent no. 4 1. Matter is heard in presence of the learned advocates representing petitioner and respondent no. 4. 2. Learned advocate representing petitioner expresses dissatisfaction with regard to steps taken while investigating Tamluk P.S. Case No. 293 of 2026 dated 13th May, 2026 under certain provisions of BNS. Prayer is made for issuing mandamus upon the concerned investigating agency to take steps which would expedite investigation. 3. Since a case is made out for issuing direction for taking forward the investigation to its logical conclusion in connection with aforesaid criminal prosecution, petitioner needs to 2 approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS 2023 in the event investigation is not being carried out appropriately. 4. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.). In paragraph 7 of Sujal Vishwas Attavar (supra) it was succinctly decided that even after registration of FIR proper investigation is not conducted in that event remedy does not ordinarily lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but party needs to approach within the statutory framework. In addition thereto, reliance is also placed on another judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 (Sakiri Vasu vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.). 5. In aforesaid conspectus present writ petition is not interfered with and same stands dismissed. 6. However, this order shall not preclude the petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate in pursuit of remedy. 3 7. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon usual undertakings. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.)