Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 33425 (CAL)

XXX v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

WPA/18940/2026 · 2026-08-18

Saugata Bhattacharyya

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

13 Ranajit (AR.CT) 18.08.2026 Ct.05 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Appellate Side) W.P.A. NO 18940 OF 2026 XXXXXXXX -vs- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Avik Ghatak, Mr. Fahad Imam, Mr. Abhinav Rakshit ….for the petitioner. Mr. D.N. Ray, Mr. Guddu Singh, Mr. Sourav Haldar ….for the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service filed on behalf of the petitioner is taken on record. 2. By presenting this writ petition, inter alia, petitioner prays for direction upon the concerned police authorities to add other relevant provisions in Kulti Police Station Case No.268/26 dated 5th June, 2026. Statements are also made with regard to certain other steps which according to petitioner by this time police authorities ought to have taken while investigating aforesaid criminal prosecution. 3. State respondents are represented by learned Government Pleader. 4. From the case made out in this writ petition, it appears that there is dissatisfaction with regard to investigation being carried out in Kulti Police Station Case No.268/26 dated 5th June, 2026. 5. If petitioner finds that investigation is not being carried out appropriately and there is requirement to add some other provisions, in that event petitioner needs to approach jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) of BNSS, 2023. 6. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2026 SCC Online SC 798 (Sujal Vishwas Attavar & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.) 7. In paragraph 7 of Sujal Vishwas Attavar (supra) it has been succinctly held that even after registration of FIR if proper investigation is not being conducted, then the remedy does not ordinarily lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but in seeking recourse to the statutory framework, unless of course the urgency of the circumstances warrant otherwise. 8. In view of availability of alternative remedy to the petitioner, writ petition is not entertained and same stands dismissed. . 9. However, this order shall not preclude petitioner to approach jurisdictional Magistrate, in pursuit of remedy. 10. It is clarified that if jurisdictional Magistrate is approached under Section 175(3) of BNSS, 2023, decision shall be taken without being influenced by the order passed today on this writ petition. 11. Parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) 2