09.09.2026 Ct. No. 30 Sl. No.48 skg CRR 3410 of 2024 Joydip Bhadra @ Joydeep Bhadra & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Abhimanyu Shandilya, Adv. Mr. Sushruta Kr. Nath, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Amajit De, Adv. Mr. Poulami Bose, Adv. Mr. Gouranga Dey, Adv. …for the O.P. No.2 Mr. Kallol Kr. Mondal, Ld. PP Mr. Brijesh Jha, Ld. APP Mr. Dipanjan Dutt, Adv. Mr. Kritika Jain, Adv. …for the State 1. Though the present revisional application has been preferred by the accused/petitioner praying for quashing of the proceeding. 2. In course of hearing the de facto complainant has placed several medical documents before this Court wherein it appears that the victim/complainant was treated at M.R. Bangur Hospital, Kolkata. 3. This Court in its order dated 24.08.2026 noted that the nature of injuries did not substantiate the offence under Section 323 IPC but prima facie of a higher offence. 4. It also appears that the victim prima facie suffered a broken jaw. It also appears that the victim suffered serious injuries on being hit with a hard metal object on the face and several other injuries as noted in the medical papers. Admittedly the accused/petitioner in the present case is a police personnel. This court takes strong exception against the investigating agency in such matters where the victim has suffered serious injuries. 2 5. On being directed the investigating officer and the officer in charge of Haridevpur Police Station are present before this Court and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State submits that there has been some laches in the investigation and prays for leave to file supplementary affidavit before the trial Court on further investigation. 6. Considering the said facts this court at this stage is not inclined to consider the prayer for quashing of the proceeding and the revisional application is disposed of with a direction to the investigating officer to proceed with further investigation and submit a supplementary charge-sheet before the trial Court within one month from the date of this order and the trial court shall then proceed in accordance with law. 7. It is clarified that the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the proper forum praying for relief as provided under the law. The disposal of the present revision shall not be considered as rejection of the revisional (quashing) application on merit. 8. The personal appearances of the police officers present are dispensed with. 9. CRR 3410 of 2024 stand disposed of. [Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.]