24.08.2026 Item no. 7 Ct. No.237 AKG C.R.R. 2091 of 2026 Rishab Surana & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Ms. Priyanka Sarkar, …for the Petitioners Mr. Kallol Mondal, Mr. Subir Ganguly, Ms. Sandeep Prasad Shaw …for the State Mr. Prasenjit Burman, Ms. Payal Koley, Mrs. Rupa Singh …for O.P. No. 2 There is no reason for the criminal proceedings arising out of Tollygunge Police Station Case No. 127 of 2025 dated 23.05.2025, under Sections 61(2), 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to be allowed to continue. The aforesaid proceedings were initiated on the basis of a complaint filed by opposite party no. 2 under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore. It has been alleged that one Late Ashok Surana had proposed the formation of a new business entity at Kolkata under the name and style of M/s. Petropack Ltd., with the proposed objective of merging the same with M/s. Epitome Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd., the Sikkim-based enterprise of opposite party no. 2. It is alleged in the complaint that the said Ashok Surana sought financial assistance from opposite party no. 2, and an 2 aggregate sum of Rs. 4,10,00,000/- was allegedly advanced through different entities and from his individual account in favour of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd. In paragraph 4 of the complaint, opposite party no. 2 admits receipt of a sum of Rs. 2.15 crores towards partial repayment of the alleged financial liability. He, however, alleges that a cheque for Rs. 2 crores was issued by Ashok Surana towards payment of the balance amount, which was subsequently dishonoured. The said Ashok Surana passed away in the year 2019. After his death, opposite party no. 2 approached the legal heirs and successors-in-interest of Ashok Surana, who are the petitioners in the present case. Petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are the nephews, and petitioner no. 3 is the son-in-law, of Ashok Surana. It is alleged that all the petitioners are presently serving at M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd. The petitioners allege that opposite party no. 2 approached them seeking repayment of the outstanding amount. However, in the course of further investigation, opposite party no. 2 allegedly found that the petitioners, without his consent and without any appropriate Board Resolution, had converted portions of the loan amount into equity shares in two companies owned by opposite party no.2, namely, Enfield Tracon Pvt. Ltd. and Eastern Commets Ltd., both of which are equity shareholders of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd. It is further alleged that a sum of Rs. 85,00,000/- was illicitly converted into shares of Enfield Tracon Ltd. and a sum of Rs. 3 86,86,750/- into shares of Eastern Commets Ltd., without any prior authorization, knowledge or documentation on the part of opposite party no. 2. It is alleged that the petitioners orchestrated a fictitious set-off by relying upon fraudulently allotted shares, thereby falsifying the company records and projecting that the debt had been repaid. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are in no way connected with the alleged transaction. It is submitted that, upon enquiry, the petitioners found that, on 09.11.2012, a transaction involving a sum of Rs. 2 crores was effected from the cash credit account of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd., maintained with the State Bank of India, Commercial Branch, Kolkata, and the said amount was credited to the account of M/s. Epitome Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd., the Sikkim- based enterprise of opposite party no. 2. In support of his submission, Mr. Ganguly has referred to page 50 of the writ petition, which contains the relevant document issued by the State Bank of India. It is further submitted that opposite party no. 2 and his son did not offer themselves for re-appointment at the 2nd Annual General Meeting of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd., held on 26.07.2013, and consequently retired by rotation. Learned Advocate appearing for opposite party no. 2 submits that Enfield Tracon Pvt. Ltd. and Eastern Commets Ltd. are both equity shareholders of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd. and that, by 4 converting the loan amount into equity shares of the said two companies, the petitioners have committed the alleged offences. This Court is unable to accept the stand taken by opposite party no. 2. Even if it is accepted that the petitioners converted the loan amount into equity shares of two companies which, admittedly, belonged to opposite party no. 2, such allegations do not constitute the ingredients of the alleged offences under Sections 61(2), 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is also apparent from the materials placed before this Court that, on 09.11.2012, a sum of Rs. 2 crores was credited to the account of M/s. Epitome Petrochemical Pvt. Ltd. from the account of M/s. Epitome Petropack Ltd. There is no explanation whatsoever as to why, even after the dishonour of the cheque for Rs. 2 crores in the year 2012, no steps were taken by opposite party no. 2 for the last thirteen years. The complaint lacks bona fides. In view of the aforesaid, Tollygunge Police Station Case No. 127 of 2025 dated 23.05.2025, under Sections 61(2), 316(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338 and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, stands quashed. Needless to mention, this shall not preclude opposite party no. 2 from approaching the competent forum for seeking appropriate legal remedies. Accordingly, CRR 2091 of 2026 stands disposed of. 5 Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Kausik Chanda, J.)