Calcutta High Court: A single-judge bench comprising of Shampa Dutt (Paul),* J., dismissed the petitioner’s revision application seeking the quashing of the proceeding against him based on the prima facie case established from the evidence and materials presented and directed that the matter is to proceed to trial.
Brief Facts
The petitioner has filed a revision petition seeking the quashing of the proceeding before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia under Sections 147/148/149/186/332/333/353 of the Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for communal and administrative disturbances occurred around Tehatta High School regarding the celebration of “Nabi Diwas” by Muslim Community students. The petitioner, a teacher of Tehatta Balika Prathamik Vidyalaya, is accused of being involved in the disturbance.
Contentions
The petitioner claims innocence and denies any connection to the case or its allegations. The petitioner presents evidence of his presence elsewhere during the alleged incident, including being on duty at the school and at the Panchayat office. It was contended that the case which was initiated against the petitioner under Section 108 of the CrPC was subsequently dropped by the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate, Uluberia. The petitioner contends that the proceeding against him is an abuse of the court’s process and should be quashed.
Court's Observations and Decision
The Court examined the evidence on record, including letters from the Headmaster of Tehatta Balika Prathamik Vidyalaya and the Pradhan of Tehatta Kantaberia No. II Gram Panchayat, indicating the petitioner’s presence at various locations during the alleged incident. The petitioner’s evidence shows his absence between 6:00 am and 10:30 am on the day of the incident, but no explanation is provided for this period.
Considering the nature of the alleged offenses and the materials on record, the Court finds a prima facie case against the petitioner, warranting further trial.
The Court dismissed the revisional application and disposed of all connected applications. Any interim order also stands vacated by the Court. The Court sent the judgment to the Trial Court for necessary compliance.
[Sk. Reajul Hoque v. State of W.B., 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 2381, order dated 17-08-2023]
*Judgment by Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Syed Nurul Arefin, Counsel for the Petitioner
Ms. Sujata Das, Counsel for the Respondent/State
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
