DEEPAK BAPNA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Sekhar Basu, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that this Court by order dated 10.01.2007 in CRR 2/2007 directed the learned Magistrate to dispose of the complaint case no. C-2344 of 1997 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a month from the date of communication of the order.

(2.) The accused/petitioner filed an application for recalling PW2 in order to confront him about one memorandum of agreement dated 12.03.1997. The learned Magistrate without assigning any reason rejected the said prayer and placed reliance on the earlier direction of this Court regarding early disposal of the case. According to Mr. Basu that document was necessary to show the date of enforceable debt or liability and the petitioner was denied that opportunity by the rejection of his application by the learned Magistrate without assigning any reason. He submits that when a prayer is made before the learned Magistrate, the learned Magistrate must assign his reason as it is within his jurisdiction.

(3.) On the contrary, Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate appearing for the opposite party submits that case is pending since 1997 and in spite of complaint case could not be disposed of earlier, and the complainant had to approach this Court at least four times and finally on 10-01.2007 this Court passed such direction to dispose of complaint case within a month from the date of communication of the order. This is nothing but dilatory tactics of the accused persons.