14.09.2026 Serial no. 30 [Srimanta] Ct. No. - 39 IA No.:CRAN/1/2025 in CRR/2120/2023 In re : An Application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -And- In the matter of : RATNA SAHA … … Petitioner. Mr. Arkaprabho Roy, Advocate … … For the petitioner. Mr. Satadru Lahiri, Mr. Moumita Pandit, Advocates ……For the State. 1. Affidavit-of-service, filed by the petitioner in Court today, be kept with the record. 2. Despite service, none appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2. 3. By filing this revisional application, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 11.04.2023 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandernagore in connection with Chandernagore Police Station Case No. 100/2018 dated 13.06.2018 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 corresponding to GR Case No. 686/2018 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Chandernagore, Hooghly. 4. By the said order, the learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance against the present petitioner under Section 306 2 of the Indian Penal Code after filing of the charge-sheet under Section 173(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the prima facie materials available in the charge-sheet. On the same day, an application, filed by the petitioner under Section 167(5) of the Cr.P.C., dated 06.03.2023, praying for discharge on the ground of delay in filing the charge-sheet, was taken up for hearing. After hearing the parties, the application was rejected. 5. The fact, in nutshell, is that one Sukanya Dasgupta, wife of Sabyasachi Dasgupta, resident of 46A/1, Lake East 6th Road, Santoshpore, Kolkata – 700 075 lodged a complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Chandernagore Police Station, District – Hooghly against the petitioner alleging that on 12.06.2018 her mother Nupur Saha, wife of Satyajit Saha committed suicide at about 07:15 P.M. at Chandernagore Railway Station due to constant abatement from the petitioner. This resulted in the registration of FIR being Chandernagore Police Station Case No. 100/2018 dated 13.06.2018 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and finally charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. 6. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the Trial Court has mechanically, and without going through the record, taken cognizance and rejected her prayer for discharge, which tantamounts to illegality 3 and perversity. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet was submitted after the lapse of four years without seeking extension of time for filing charge sheet. The Petitioner had filed an application to stop further investigation of the offence and discharge of the petitioner from the case. The Trial Court did not invoke Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure although it provides only three years for filing charge sheet from the date on which the accused was arrested or made his appearance before the Trial Court. 7. Learned Counsel, on the other hand, representing the State, strenuously opposes the prayer of the petitioner and further submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted within the time stipulated in Section 167(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The charge-sheet was submitted vide charge-sheet No. 179/2018 dated 31.12.2018 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused, Ratna Saha, who is the petitioner herein. The said charge- sheet was placed before the Trial Court on 11.04.2023, although it was submitted before the Trial Court in time. 8. Having heard the submissions of the learned Counsels for the respective parties and on perusal of the materials-on- record as well as the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, this Court is fully satisfied that a charge-sheet has been submitted within the stipulated time although it was not placed before the learned Judicial Magistrate for 4 necessary order on the date when charge sheet was filed, but, the charge-sheet was lying in the office of the A.C.J.M., Chandernagore. That however does not give the Trial Court power to allow the benefits in favour of the accused. The Learned Magistrate can very well take cognizance on the materials collected during the period, as stipulated in Section 167 (5) of the CrPC, which does not create a bar to take cognizance on the materials available in the Charge Sheet, which as a matter of fact was completed within the time. 9. Accordingly, this revisional application fails being devoid of merits. Thus, the revisional application being CRR/2120/2023 is dismissed. CRAN 1 of 2025 is also, thus, disposed of. 10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 11. The impugned order dated 11.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandernagore in connection with Chandernagore Police Station Case No. 100/2018 dated 13.06.2018 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 corresponding to GR Case No. 686/2018 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Chandernagore, Hooghly calls for no interference and is hereby affirmed. 12. Case diary, if any, be returned to the learned counsel for the State. 5 13. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned Trial Court for information. 14. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of the Calcutta High Court. 15. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on compliance with necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)