LAWS(CAL)-2022-1-33

DR. NAZRUL ISLAM Vs. BASUDEB BANERJEE

Decided On January 25, 2022
Dr. Nazrul Islam Appellant
V/S
Basudeb Banerjee Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revisional application has been preferred against the order dtd. 27/9/2013 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta, in connection with case no. C/31586/13.

(2.) By the said order the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was pleased to reject the application under Sec. 156(3) of Code Criminal Procedure filed at the instance of the petitioner, wherein the offences referred to were under Ss. 166/167/218/219/463/464/465/466/471 of the Indian Penal Code, allegedly being committed by the opposite parties namely; (i) Basudeb Banerjee, Home Secretary, Govt. Of West Bengal; (ii) A. Sengupta, WBCS (Exe), Joint Secretary, Vigilance Cell, P&AR Department, Govt. Of West Bengal; (iii) Sanjay Mitra, Chief Secretary, Govt. Of West Bengal; (iv) Mamata Banerjee, Chief Minister and Minister in charge of Home Department and P&AR Department, Govt. Of West Bengal; (v) S.N. Haque, Additional Chief Secretary, ARD Department, Govt. Of West Bengal; (vi) Naparajit Mukherjee, DG&IGP WB Police Directorate. The learned Magistrate was pleased to observe that no offence under the said Ss. were committed by the opposite parties and also observed that even if it is presumed that the offences were committed sanction would be required under Sec. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) The petitioner being aggrieved approached this Court against the order passed by the learned Magistrate. The first contention of the petitioner is that the substantive offences so alleged were committed by the opposite parties and for the purpose of investigation no sanction is required. In order to substantiate his argument the petitioner contended that in this case the opposite parties/accused entered into criminal conspiracy, prepared incorrect documents, prepared incorrect translation, forged the contents of his book, forged the Supreme Court judgment and used them as genuine for injuring him which by no stretch of imagination can be said to be work done in discharge of their official duties.