SABITRI PRAMANIK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is directed against the Order dtd. 30/6/2022 of Learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur, passed in G.R. Case number 639 of 2006 arising out of Contai Police Station Case number 232 of 2006 dated December 12, 2006 under Sec. 420/468/ 471/409/34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860, whereby Ld. Judicial Magistrate has allowed the application of Dr. Bidhan Roy, filed U/S 319 of Cr.P.C, for addition of Santi Pada Bera, erstwhile Branch Manager of UBI bank and Sabitri Pramanik as an accused in said GR case.

(2.) Briefly stated, one written complaint U/S 156 (3) of Cr.P.C, was filed by Dr. Bidhan Roy to the Court of Ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Contai, Purba Medinipur, against Gopal Pramanik, Narayan Chandra Pusti and Santi Pada Bera upon which Ld. ACJM directed to the Officer-in-charge of Contai Police Station to register a case treating complaint petition as F.I.R and enquire into the allegations, vide his order dtd. 18/10/2006. Accordingly, Contai Police Station Case number 232 of 2006 dated December 12, 2006 under Sec. 420/468/471/409/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the accused Gopal Pramanik, (the husband of petitioner), Narayan Chandra Pusti, (the erstwhile Bank Manager UBI Contai Branch who sanctioned loan to Gopal Pramanik against the mortgage of sale deed of Dr. Bidhan Roy, and the then Branch Manager UBI Bank Khejuri Branch) and Santi Pada Bera, (Bank Manager UBI Bank Contai Branch succeeded Narayan Chandra Pusti). After investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Sec. 420/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860, only against Gopal Pramanik. Ld. A.C.J.M has taken cognizance of the offence thereupon and transferred it to Ld. Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court Contai for trial, after rejecting the protest petition U/S 173(8) of Cr.P.C filed by the de facto complainant (Opposite Party No.-2 herein). He again filed an application before the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court (Ld. Trial Court) praying for further investigation, but the said application was also rejected by Learned Trial Court and proceeded for framing of charge against the Gopal Pramanik for the offence under Sec. 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 860.

(3.) Consequent upon the examination of de facto complainant (Opposite Party No.-2 herein) as prosecution witness number -1, the prosecution filed an application before the trial court under Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for proceeding against the Narayan Chandra Pausthi and Sri Saktipada Bera, whose name appeared in the evidence to show him guilty of the offence, but the said application was rejected by the Learned Trial Court on 4/12/2011. The said Order of rejection prompted the O.P 2 to challenged it before this High Court by filing a Revisional Application being CRR No 333 of 2011. This application was disposed of by an Order dated March 16, 2016, whereby this Court modified the Order of Learned Trial Court dated December-04, 2010, to the extent that the Trial Court would like to proceed against Sri Narayana Chandra Pusthi for the offence u/s 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also directed the Ld. Magistrate to take step against the Sri Narayana Chandra Pusthi in accordance with the provision of Sec. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and it was also observed that the evidence adduced by P.W-1 is not sufficient to proceed against the Sri Saktipada Bera.