23.09.2026 SL No. 15 Court No. 34 Rohan IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE CRR 4092 of 2024 With I.A. No.: CRAN 1 of 2025 I.A. No.: CRAN 2 of 2025 Sri Amit Gupta Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Susanta Kumar Pal … for the Petitioner 1. This revisional application has been filed by the petitioner for exercising the inherent power to prevent the abuse of the process of the proceeding which includes an order dated July 18, 2024, now pending before the learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Barrackpore, District – North 24- Parganas. 2. The brief fact as can be gathered from the contents of the revisional application as well as from the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner that a property dispute was in existence between the mother and the son and over the same, a civil suit is pending between them. It can be further found from the record that originally, the father of the present petitioner and the husband of the opposite party No. 2 was the owner of the disputed property and the shop in question and after his demise, the present parties along with one daughter of the deceased, became co-sharer in respect of the said property. 2 3. A complaint was lodged by the mother/opposite party No. 2 before the Officer-in-Charge, Khardah Police Station against the present petitioner, being her son, alleging threats given to her by the son and abused her with filthy languages and also forced her to leave the shop-room so that the petitioner can enjoy the property and continue his business. It was further contended by the mother that she runs a business from the said shop-room in order to survive as the present petitioner refused to maintain her and this is her only source of income but the present petitioner, being the son, is intended to take away the said shop-room forcefully. 4. Over the said complaint, Khardah Police Station Case No. 90 of 2024 dated February 8, 2024 was started against the present petitioner and on completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted under Sections 341/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Section 24 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The present petitioner has come up for quashing the entire proceedings including the order dated July 18, 2024. 5. Vide such order, it was recorded that the present petitioner is released on bail .The copy of the charge-sheet is ready .The accused is present .Direction was given to supply the copy of the charge-sheet to the accused persons and the matter was directed to be transferred to the learned Court of 4th Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore for disposal. 6. Therefore, prima facie in the order impugned, nothing can be found for which any interference is necessary as the petitioner 3 can never be prejudiced by any part of the said order. The cognizance of the charge-sheet was been taken on April 20, 2024 and that order has not been challenged. 7. In this case, none appears on behalf of the opposite party No. 2. More interestingly, State is also not represented. From the record the name of one Mr. Bithin Modal, learned advocate can be seen who represented the private opposite party on September 16, 2026 and on the prayer made by the petitioner, the matter was adjourned for a week. 8. It further transpires that the matter was sent for mediation, however, in terms of the mediation report, the same was not successful. Therefore, in absence of any of the opposite parties, this Court is not in a position to peruse the case diary, however, the document under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. since received by the petitioner and have been annexed with the petition including the statements recorded in course of evidence and other documents in the charge-sheet the same can very well be perused. 9. After careful analysis of the entire facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations leveled, when civil dispute appears to be pending between the parties, this Court is prima facie of the opinion that nothing can be found in order to exercise the inherent power of this Court for either setting aside the order dated July 18, 2024 or for quashing of the entire proceedings. The specific allegations leveled against the present petitioner has been prima facie established by submitting the 4 charge-sheet and the veracity of the same needs to be decided in course of trial. None of the parameters as stated in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and others reported in 1992 Supp(1) SCC 335 has been found for which this court is required to exercise the inherent power and hence, this Court do not find it a fit case where it can be said that continuation of this proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. 10. Therefore, the revisional application stands dismissed in absence of the opposite parties. 11. Connected applications also stand disposed of. 12. All parties to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 13. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.)