Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 260 (CAL)

Mrinmoy Chandan Dutta v. State of West Bengal

2018-02-15

DEBI PROSAD DEY

body2018
JUDGMENT : DEBI PROSAD DEY, J. 1. Challenge in this revisional application is the Order No. 41 dated 28th September 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bongon, District North 24 Paraganas, in ST 2(7) of 2015 (S.C No. 20 (3) of 2014) arising out of Bongon Police Station Case No. 855 of 2013 dated 26.11.2013 under Sections 498A/406/302 of the Indian penal Code pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bongon, District North 24 Paraganas. 2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the learned Judge did not dispose of the application under Section 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and order impugned has been suffering from serious infirmities and accordingly required to be set aside. It is further submitted that no final opinion has yet been obtained about the mental health of accused Mrinmoy Chandan Dutta. 3. Learned Advocate Mr. Ayan Bose appearing on behalf of the State contended that the petitioners have been impleaded under Sections 498A/406/302 of the Indian Penal Code and the petitioners are deferring the hearing of the case on some pretext or other. Learned Advocate Mr. Bose further contended that in fact the instant revisional application has become infructuous since the learned trial Court has passed such order in terms of the order passed by this Court in CRR 1387 of 2017. Server copy of the said order has been handed over to this Court, wherefrom I find that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has directed the learned trial Court to conclude the enquiry with regard to mental state of the petitioner no. 1 at an early date. The subsequent order of learned trial Court dated 18th April 2017 was challenged before this Court and a coordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of CRR No. 1387 of 2017 directing the trial Court to complete the exercise as expeditiously as possible. In terms of the said direction the learned trial Court has directed the concerned authorities to examine the petitioner. 4. On scrutiny of the order dated 28th September 2016 being Order No. 41, I find that one Doctor of the Department of Psychiatry, Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital had virtually submitted report without observation of the patient for the stipulated period. The order of learned trial Judge further reveals that the patient was released from Pavlov hospital for undergoing heart surgery. The order of learned trial Judge further reveals that the patient was released from Pavlov hospital for undergoing heart surgery. 5. Mr. Ghosh, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the petitioner no. 1 has been suffering from psychiatric problem since 2005. It transpires from the record that the petitioner no. 1 got married in the year 2013 and he has fathered a child. The allegation against the petitioners is that all the petitioners throttled the victim and thereby killed the victim. At this belated stage the plea of insanity has been taken only with the view to defer the hearing of the case and the petitioners have been able to defer the hearing of the case for a considerable period of time. 6. Learned Advocate Mr. Bose drawing the attention of this Court to the case diary contended that there is sufficient materials against the petitioners in order to rope them in a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. The entire exercise has been under taken by the learned trial Court in order to come to a definite finding about the mental health of the petitioner Mrinmoy Chandan Dutta and therefore no order is required with regard to the application under Section 329 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in terms of the prayer of learned Advocate for the petitioners. Moreover, further prayer of the petitioner to transfer the case from the Court concerned appears to be made out of frustration in order to avoid the trial of the case. I find no reason to transfer the instant case from the trial Court. Accordingly such prayer is also refused. 8. It is apparent from the submission of the learned Advocate for the petitioners that the case has already been fixed for examination of witnesses. The learned trial Court has thus definitely been satisfied about the mental condition of the petitioner, Mrinmoy Chandan Dutta fixed the date for examination of the witnesses. In view of the disposal of CRR 1387 of 2017 the instant revisional application becomes infructuous. I do not find any illegality in the order No. 41 of 2016 dated 28.09.2016 The instant Criminal Revisional Application being devoid of merit, stands dismissed. The stay order if there be any stands vacated. 9. The trial Court is directed to complete the trial of the sessions case as expeditiously as possible. I do not find any illegality in the order No. 41 of 2016 dated 28.09.2016 The instant Criminal Revisional Application being devoid of merit, stands dismissed. The stay order if there be any stands vacated. 9. The trial Court is directed to complete the trial of the sessions case as expeditiously as possible. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bongon forthwith for information and necessary action. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.