S C SHUKLA Vs. DILIP CHATTOPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this criminal revisional application petitioners challenge an order passed in connection with a proceeding arising out of a complaint case relating to the offences punishable under Sections 174/175 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby their prayer for dismissal of the said complaint and discharge from the case has been rejected.

(2.) MR. Sanjoy Chakraborty, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended before this Court that the impugned complaint was lodged by the complainant Shri Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay in the capacity of a public servant and on the allegation of disobedience of his order by the accused persons and therefore after his retirement from service, when he ceased to be a public servant the aforesaid complaint becomes infructuous and is liable to be dropped. According to him the complainant Dilip Kumar chattopadhyay has retired from the service long back, but till date in spite of the order of the Court passed on 8th July, 2008, nothing has been done by the prosecution to substitute him. He further submitted as it is evident from the materials on record no letter of authorization from the department was filed along with the petition of complaint that by itself is a ground for dismissal of the same. Lastly, Mr. Chakraborty submitted the aforesaid case is pending for more than 14 years without any fault of the accused, as such same being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, the impugned case is liable to be quashed.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. Himangshu De, the learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. I/d. R. I, strongly repudiated the submissions of Mr. Chakraborty and contended that the grounds on which the petitioner prayed for discharge in the Court below none of them are tenable in law. Therefore, the learned Magistrate very rightly rejected their prayer for discharge.