GOPAL MAITY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Heard the submission of the learned Advocate for the petitioners Mr. S.S. Roy appearing with Mr. Mahananda Roy, the learned Advocate for the de facto complainant, Mr. Manas Ranjan Chakraborty, appearing with the learned Advocates Mr. Samiran Girl and Mr. Md. Mokram Hossain and the Learned. Advocate for the State, Mr. Sasanka Kr. Ghosh. Considered the materials on record.

(2.) By this revision under section 401 read with section 482 of the Cr.P.C. the petitioners, who were figured as accused in the trial, have come up before this Court to challenge order dated 30-1-95 passed in Criminal Motion No. 208 of 1994 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Midnapore, whereby the learned Assistant Sessions Judge allowed the revision as filed by the State, set aside the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tamluk and directed the said Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate to deliver a judgment on the basis of the evidence on record and to deliver the same within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of his order.

(3.) This is a case where the petitioners were compelled to hang on the tenterhook due to the bungling in the process of judicial decision for a period spreading for more than two decades.