Sl. No.12 13.08.2026 Suman Ct. 237 CRR 3253 of 2026 Birendra Kumar Gupta @ B.K. Gupta and Another Vs. The State of West Bengal Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee Mr. Tirupati Mukherjee Mr. Rishab Ahmed Khan Ms. Anushka Bose Ms. Rai Das Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya Mr. Sayed Hossain ..for the petitioners Mr. Kallol Mondal, ld. P.P. Mr. Subir Ganguly, Mr. Sandeep Prasad Shaw ..for the State It appears that the learned Municipal Magistrate, 4th Court, Calcutta, by an order dated January 7, 2025, issued warrant of arrest against the petitioners for their failure to appear before the learned Magistrate in connection with G.R. Case No. 193 of 2023, arising out of Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 260 of 2021, dated September 25, 2021, under Sections 401A/607/610 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act. The petitioners, however, remained absent on the subsequent dates fixed for hearing. On August 7, 2025, the learned Magistrate fixed August 25, 2025, for submission of the execution report in respect of the “WPA” issued against the petitioners. It does not, however, appear that any order of proclamation or attachment was ever issued by the learned Magistrate in the court below. From the subsequent orders passed by the learned Magistrate, it appears that repeated dates were fixed for submission of the execution report in respect of the “WPA”. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits before this Court that petitioner no. 1 is aged about 104 years, whereas petitioner no. 2 is aged about 63 years. It is further submitted that, in any event, the learned Magistrate was not justified in issuing the “WPA” simultaneously against both the petitioners. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner no.2 is stayed for a period of three weeks from the date of this order, subject to the condition that petitioner no. 2 shall surrender before the learned Magistrate within the said period. In the event petitioner no. 2 surrenders before the learned Magistrate within the aforesaid period, any application for bail filed on his behalf shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, without being influenced by the observations made in this order. In the event petitioner no. 2 fails to surrender in terms of this order within the stipulated period, the warrant of arrest shall stand revived automatically, and the learned Magistrate shall be at liberty to execute the same in accordance with law. 2 Insofar as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, there shall be an unconditional stay of the warrant of arrest issued against him for a period of thirty days from the date hereof. Liberty is granted to petitioner no. 1 to file an application under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. If no such application is filed, the warrant of arrest shall stand revived automatically after thirty days from the date hereof. If the application is filed under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law, keeping in mind the advanced age of petitioner no. 1, and there shall be a stay of the warrant of arrest issued against petitioner no. 1 till the disposal of the said application by the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, CRR 3253 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