SUTAPA ADHIKARI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the impugned notices dtd. 11/7/2022 issued to the petitioners herein under Sec. 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.) in connection with the Contai Police Station Case No. 46 of 2022, dtd. 31/1/2022, present application under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed. Petitioners alleged that the petitioners are the family members and have close acquaintance with the leader of the opposition in the state of West Bengal, who are being targeted by the ruling party being hand in gloves with the police administration for their association with the leader of the opposition.

(2.) Petitioners' case is on 31/1/2022 a written complaint was submitted by the present opposite party no. 2, alleging commission of offence under sec. 120B/409/477A of Indian Penal Code, alleging interalia that certain works which were done under Contai Municipality under development scheme are deceptive in nature. It has been stated in the FIR that in the year 2017 and 2018 certain development and beautification works were undertaken at places in Contai town which were to be implemented by the Contai Municipality but it has been alleged that each work has cost crores of rupees which sounds illogical and unjustifiable. It has been further alleged all of such works have been documented to have been completed in the year of 2019, yet no work was done then. In fact actual repairing works that can be seen to have been done under the said municipality area, can no way match the expenditure cited by the agencies.

(3.) Petitioners contended that they came to learn that on the basis of said written complain, the investigation initiated against two persons namely Dilip Kumar Chouhan and Samir Kumar Dey. Said accused persons challenging the FIR, preferred Revisional Application before this court being CRR 414 of 2022 and obtained an interim order of stay of all further proceedings but the said revisional application was subsequently dismissed as not pressed vide order dtd. 17/5/2022. Such aspect raises questions in the mind of the petitioners. Petitioners contended in the above backdrop the investigating agency on the basis of aforesaid malevolent determination and in order to carry on a malafide investigation, which has been initiated on the basis of aforesaid written complain, having no legal standing whatsoever, has issued the impugned notices dtd. 11/7/2022 under sec. 160 of the Cr.P.C., in order to harass the petitioners and to carry on a spiteful investigation. Petitioners had given reply to such notice through their advocate and petitioners further submit that they are not at all acquainted in any manner whatsoever with the facts and circumstances of the case for the purpose of aiding the investigation and notices have solely been issued due to their proximity with the leader of the opposition and his younger brother. Petitioners contended that investigating agency is acting as per the whims of their political overlords and are conducting a spiteful investigation in this regard. They further submit that concerned documents are matters of record and the petitioner are nowhere acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the said case and notices herein are bereft of reasons and notices are illegal arbitrary unreasonable and prejudicial to the interest of the justice and as such are liable to be set aside.