31.07.2026 Sl. No.06. Ct. No.237 Suman CRR 990 of 2026 Harjot Singh -vs- The State of West Bengal and Anr. Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rana Mukherjee Mr. D. Dutta ..for the petitioner Mr. Kallol Mondal, ld. P.P. Mr. Subir Ganguly Mr. Sandeep Prasad Shaw ..for the State The petitioner seeks quashing of CGR Case No. 1189 of 2012, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, arising out of Gariahat Police Station Case No. 120 of 2012 dated 20.03.2012, under Sections 279/427 of the Indian Penal Code. Despite due service of notice, Opposite Party No. 2 remains unrepresented. By an order dated July 21, 2026, this Court directed the State to produce the case diary. However, Mr. Subir Ganguly, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State, has submitted that despite diligent efforts and extensive search, the case diary could not be traced, as the matter pertains to a case registered more than 14 years ago. The case was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by Opposite Party No. 2 dated March 20, 2012, wherein it was alleged, inter alia, that his car was parked near Golpark, Kolkata, when another car, allegedly driven by the petitioner, collided with it from behind while being driven at a “ferocious speed”. It is an admitted position before this Court that no injury was sustained by the de facto complainant and that the alleged incident resulted only in damage to his vehicle. Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Agency submitted a charge sheet under Sections 279/427 of the Indian Penal Code. It appears that, despite the lapse of more than 14 years, there has been no substantial progress in the proceedings. It is also an admitted position that no charge has been framed by the learned Magistrate after taking cognizance of the alleged offences. Having regard to the nature of the offences involved in the present matter, this Court is of the view that the petitioner’s constitutional right to a speedy trial has been infringed due to the inordinate delay in the continuation of the proceedings. This Court further finds that, during the course of investigation, no material could be collected by the Investigating Agency capable of establishing a connection between the petitioner and the alleged commission of the offences. The statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as well as the statements of the alleged eyewitnesses, do not disclose any incriminating material against the petitioner. 2 In the considered view of this Court, no prosecutable evidence has been collected by the Investigating Agency during the course of investigation. In such circumstances, compelling the petitioner to undergo a full-fledged trial would serve no meaningful purpose and would amount to an exercise in futility. Accordingly, CGR Case No. 1189 of 2012, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, arising out of Gariahat Police Station Case No. 120 of 2012 dated 20.03.2012 under Sections 279/427 of the Indian Penal Code, stands quashed. The petitioner shall stand discharged from the bail bond executed before the learned trial Court. It is, however, recorded that the petitioner has voluntarily offered to contribute a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) towards charitable purposes. The petitioner shall deposit the said sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with the State Legal Services Authority by way of cheque within a period of seven days from the date of this order. The said amount shall be utilized for the purposes of mediation. Accordingly, CRR 990 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.) 3