17.08.2026 Item No.03 Court No.01 Avijit Mitra FMA 695 of 2026 with IA No.CAN 1 of 2026 Hanif Sekh - Versus – The State of West Bengal & ors. Mr. Kunal Ganguly, Ms. Salma-S-Shah ….for the appellant Mr. Ajit Kumar Mishra, AGP, Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar, Mr. Sovan Mukherjee, Mr. Milind Mohul Ghosh, Mr. Palash Bapari ….for the State The present appeal has been preferred challenging, inter alia, an order dated 20th March, 2026 passed by the learned single Judge in the writ petition being WPA 6400 of 2026. The said writ petition was preferred by the writ petitioner/appellant stating, inter alia, that he was the lawful owner of one motor bike bearing registration being no. WB 66S 4249. The said motor bike was stolen from the appellant’s residence on 21st August, 2020. Such fact was immediately reported to the police authorities by a representation dated 22nd August, 2020. However, no steps were taken. In the month of January, 2026, the appellant was shocked to receive a message on his mobile phone informing that an e-challan had been issued against his motor bike. From such message, it was clear that the stolen motor bike is being used by some person illegally. The entire episode was, thereafter, reported to the respondent no.4 by a representation dated 04th February, 2026 and as no steps were taken, a further representation was submitted to the respondent no.3 on 10th February, 2026. As the police authorities did not take any steps, the appellant was constrained to prefer the writ petition. Mr. Ganguly, learned advocate appearing for the appellant argues that the police authorities have failed to discharge their statutory obligations. From the e-challan, as issued, it is explicit that the vehicle has been stolen but the police authorities did not take appropriate steps. Such argument, as advanced, was glossed over by the learned single Judge and the writ petition was abruptly dismissed without even calling for any affidavits. Records would reveal that when the matter was last taken up for hearing on 1st August, 2026, Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Pleader was engaged and was directed to avail all necessary instructions. Mr. Mishra submits today that the complaint of the appellant has already been registered as an FIR being Malda Police Station Case No.552 of 2026 dated 06th August, 2026 under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code and that investigation is continuing. 2 We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. It is the contention of the appellant that he lost his motor bike way back in the month of August, 2020. No explanation is forthcoming as to why the appellant did not avail the remedies provided under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code contemporaneously save and except issuance of letter to the respondent no.4. In view thereof, the learned single Judge has rightly refused to exercise discretion in favour of the appellant. However, it appears that responding to the complaint lodged by the appellant, a formal FIR has been registered by the police authorities and that the investigation is still continuing. Needless to observe, the police authorities would conclude such investigation as expeditiously as possible. The appeal and the connected application are, accordingly, disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the learned advocates for the parties. ( Atarup Banerjee, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, A.C.J.) 3