STATE OF W B Vs. DEBANJAN DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present application, the petitioner/ State of West Bengal has challenged an order dated 3.8.2004 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Alipore in B.G.R. Case No. 1581 of 1995 (arising out of Thakurpukur P.S. Case No. 251 dated 21.6.95 under sections 363/364/366/120B of the Indian Penal Code. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate rejected the prayer of the investigating officer for remand of the accused persons to police custody for a further period of 11 days.

(2.) Six students of Jadavpur University, including the present petitioners, under the guidance of Mr. Biswanath Rana aged about 55 years and Mrs. Ira Rana aged about 45 years went to Chandipur, Orissa during summer vacation for 3 days. The excursion team consisting of eight persons reached Chandipur in the morning of 13.5.95 at about 11.00 A.M. They had their accommodation in Shantinivas Guest House. On 16.5.95 when the team was ready to leave Chandipur in the morning at about 7.00 A.M. for Calcutta, it came to the notice of other members of the team that Miss Sushmita Dhar was missing. The other members of the team immediately informed the matter to the manager of the Guest House, as also Chandipur Police Station, where a case was registered being FIR No. 272 dated 16.5.95. The missing girl was searched by the officers of Chandipur P.S. but she could not be traced. The defacto complainant also went to Chandipur and requested the officers of Chandipur P.S. to trace out his missing daughter. But no fruitful result came out. The father of the victim, Susmita, thereafter came to Calcuta and on the basis of his complainant, present case was registered with Thakurpukur Police Station. Investigation of the case was taken up by CID West Bengal. The informant thereafter being dissatisfied with the investigation conducted by the CID, preferred a writ application before this Court praying for a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus. Writ application was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court on 30.11.95 with an observation that there was no justification, whatsoever, in continuing with the application for Habeas Corpus unless it was found prima facie that the respondents or any other person was guilty of detaining the missing girl unlawfully.

(3.) On 31.8.95, the accused/opposite parties were granted anticipatory bail by the learned Session Judge after considering the materials in the case diary.