Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 41444 (CAL)

PRADEEPTA @ PRODEEPTA @ PRAADEEPTA BANERJEE v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRR/3932/2026 · 2026-09-17

Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

17.9.2026 5 sb CRR 3932 of 2026 Sri Pradeepta @ Prodeepta @ Praadeepta Banerjee Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr. Dr. Saibal Basu …for the Petitioner In this application, the petitioner herein has prayed for a direction upon the court below for expeditious disposal of the proceeding being ACGR case no. 4310 of 2020, presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Alipore. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid proceeding, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the opposite party/defacto-complainant initiated a proceeding on 3.10.2020 under Sections 498A/307/406/34 of the IPC. After completion of investigation, police submitted charge- sheet on 14.12.2021. Since then, only cross examination of CSW-1 has been done in part in the last five years. He further submits that upon perusal of the order, it is revealed that the since commencement of trial on 1st April, 2024, the petitioner has been present before the court below either by himself or through his learned advocate on each and every date but the opposite party no. 2 has sought for adjournment on repeated occasions and the examination in chief of the opposite party no. 2/PW-1 commenced on 28th December, 2024 and could be completed only on 5th January, 2025 and the cross- 2 examination commenced on the same date but it is still pending. He further submits that the prosecution proposes to examine eight witnesses and if the trial goes on in this way, nobody knows when the trial would be completed. He further submits that such inordinate delay in disposal of the proceeding violates the accused person/petitioner’s right to a fair, just and reasonable procedure of trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the prayer made by the petitioner is innocuous and if it is allowed in terms of the prayer made therein, the opposite parties will have no cause to prejudice and as such, the service of copy of application upon the opposite parties is hereby dispensed with. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and that the trial of the said proceeding has not substantially progressed for the last five years, I find that the prayer made by the petitioner is justified and is required to be allowed to secure the ends of justice. In view of above, the instant application being CRR 3932 of 2026 is hereby disposed of with a direction upon the court below to make every endeavour for expeditious disposal of the proceeding being ACGR case no. 4310 of 2020 arising out of Garfa Police Station case no 361 of 2020 dated 3.10.2020 and to make his best endeavour to conclude the entire proceeding preferably within a period of six months from the next date of hearing. 3 Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)