22.09.2026 Sl.No. 7 Ct. 39 Amalranjan IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE CRR/2492/2023 SAIDUL KARIKAR VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR 1. None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call. No accommodation has been sought for. Even on earlier occasions, none represented the petitioner. 2. This case pertains to the year 2023. 3. Considering the nature of prayer and long pendency of this case, this court prefers to decide the case on merits based on the materials available on record. 4. The petitioner herein, by filing this revisional application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeks quashing of the proceedings being Case No. M.P. No. 983/2021 dated 23.11.2021 pending before the Executive Magistrate, Basirhat, North 24-Parganas. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the opposite party no. 2, namely, Safeda Karikar, had filed a petition under Section 144(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code against the petitioner. The case was registered as Case No. M.P. No. 983/2021 dated 23.11.2021. There was a property dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2. 2 6. Learned Sub-Divisional Executive Magistrate at Basirhat, North 24 Parganas, after hearing, the Learned Executive Magistrate was pleased to pass the order as follows: “….O/C, Hingalganj Police Station is directed to enquire into the matter and submit peace & tranquillity at the area strictly, so that no one can disturb each other. B.L. & L.R.O., Hingalganj is directed enquire into the matter and submit report by next fixed date considering the following points: 1. Owner of suit land; 2. Possession report of suit land with sketch map; 3. Present physical status of suit land.” 7. Thereafter, several orders were passed. Now, after filing of this instant revisional application, it has already been elapsed 3 years. In view of the provisions as stipulated in sub-Section 4 of Section 144 of the Cr.P.C… “No order under this Section shall remain in force for more than 2 months from the making thereof: provided that if the State Government considers if necessary, so to do for preventing a riot or any affray, it may by notification direct that an order made by a Magistrate under this Section shall remain in force for such further period not exceeding six months from date on which the order made by the Magistrate would have but for such order, expired as it may specify in the said notification”. 8. Considering the case of the petitioner and upon perusal of the documents annexed with the application, this court does not find any illegality in the impugned order 3 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Hooghly and furthermore, order passed by the Executive Magistrate, Sadar shall not remain in force for more than two months from the date of making of such order provided under the State Government’s discretion. It can be extended to six months. After lapse of 3 years, the proceedings under Section 144(2) of the Cr.P.C. no longer survive. In view of the above facts, the revisional application has become infructuous. 9. Accordingly, CRR 2492 of 2023 is disposed of. 10. Consequently, the application, if any, is thus dismissed. 11. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 12. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court below forthwith. 13. All parties shall act in terms of the copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this court. 14. Concerned Department is directed to supply certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)