Kolkata Court May 2008 Judgments

Badal Dey and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT138(HC)

Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 20th Janaury, 2004 passed by Sri K.R. Ahmed, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad in Sessions Trial No. 680 of 2002 arising out of G.R. Case No. 485 of 1996 convicting the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and an order dated 21st January, 2004 by which the appellants were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months each.2. The accused Nemai Pal, Kalu Pal and Babu Pal, tried as the co-accused, have been acquitted from the charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.3. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 4th April, 1996 at about 4.00 P.M. the appellants Badal and Nakul aided by the appellants Sanjoy and Santi, hurled two bombs at Santosh Nandi. As a result he fell down. Wife of the vic...

Bimal Khemka Vs. A.L.K.B. Chand and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)3CALLT211(HC),2008(3)CHN194

Soumitra Pal, J.1. This writ petition was filed on 9th October, 2007 challenging the order dated 7th September, 2007 passed under Section 7(1) and Section 7(3) as also under Section 19(1) of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 ('SAFEMA' for short). During its pendency, on 25th March, 2008, the wife of the petitioner filed an application being G.A. No. 929 of 2008 for addition of party and also challenging the notice under Section 6(1) of SAFEMA dated 3rd March, 2008. Subsequently, on 16th April, 2008, the writ petitioner filed an application being G.A. No. 1246 of 2008 for amendment of the writ petition for incorporating statements, and grounds challenging the order of detention dated 22nd August, 1995 passed under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'COFEPOSA') and for consequential reliefs.2. The facts of the case are as follows:The petitioner was served with a...

Kakali Mahato Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(4)CHN386,2008CriLJ3725

Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The victim aged 16 years belonging to a poor family under Pathar Pratima police station was offered a Job of maidservant at Delhi by the appellant against monthly remuneration of Rs. 1,000/-. Accordingly, with the consent of her parents she was taken by the appellant to Delhi on or about 14th December 2003 but at Delhi she was not given any job in the house of the appellant and after she had spent a few days in the house of the appellant the appellant told the victim to go to different men and if she could please them she would be given handsome amount in return. She was not agreeable to the proposal but she was forced to go to different men so as to fulfill their carnal desire. Things went like this for months but she could not bear It any more and the appellant was compelled to take her to her mother on 15-2-04. Thus allegedly the appellant took the victim to Delhi with the temptation to find out a job for her but tortured her physically and mentally and ruin...

Sunita JaIn and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(4)CHN555

Partha Sakha Datta, J.1. The two petitioners pray for quashing of a proceeding being Siliguri PS Case No. 73 of 2006 dated 17.03.2006 under Section 88(5)/88(C) and 88(7) of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 read with Section 10(e) of the Central Sales Tax Act 1956 and under Sections 409/468/471/420 and 120B of the IPC corresponding to G.R. Case No. 222 of 2006 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siliguri.2. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Siliguri charge, lodged and FIR with the OC, Siliguri PS being Siliguri PS FIR No. 73 of 2006 dated 17.03.2006 against the present two petitioners alleging the following facts:Susmita Jain, the petitioner No. 1 wife of the petitioner No. 2 had been carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Jain Sons and Bros. at Siliguri and submitted a return for the period from 01.04.2001 to 31.03.2002 under the Central Sales Tax Act 1956 and claimed inter-State sale of tea under Section Tax Act 1956 and claimed i...

Supriya Basu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Tapen Sen, J.1. This Writ Petition has come to us from the Order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta dismissing T.A. No. 1 of 1999 (W.P. No. 15480 (W) of 1997) on 15.3.2007 by Annexure- P 44. Apart from praying for the quashing of the said Order of the Tribunal, the Petitioner also prays for the following reliefs:a) for quashing the Order dated 16.7.1996 (Annexure- P 6) passed by the Director (Respondent No. 6) whereby and whereunder, in purported exercise of powers conferred upon him under Rule 10(1) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 and in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings, the Petitioner was sought to be put under suspension with a direction that he should not leave Head Quarters (Calcutta) without obtaining his permission; b) for quashing the Charge-sheet dated 27.9.1996 (Annexure-P 8) issued by the said Director-cum-adhoc Disciplinary Authority, Regional Medical Research Centre for Tribals (ICMR), Ja...

Buddheswar Pramanik and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008CriLJ2733

Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 30th August 2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court 1, Alipur, South 24 Parganas, in Sessions Trial No. 3(1) of 2003 arising out of Sessions Case No. 5(1) of 2003 convicting the appellants under Sections 302/201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and an order dated 31st August 2004 by which the appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life as also to pay a fine of Rs. 4000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months each for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. They were also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case...

Saroj Alias Suraj Panchal and ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and Three ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)2CALLT427(HC)

Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment dated 19th June, 2002, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Howrah, in Sessions Trial Case No. XXX(April), 2000, convicting the appellants for a charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and an order dated 20th June, 2002, by which the appellants were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- each; in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the aforesaid offence.2. The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows:On 10th July, 1990, at about 8 P.M. in the evening Sukumar Roy, aged about 25 years, was beaten severely by the appellants. He was hospitalised with Bagnan Hospital from where he was referred to Uluberia hospital where he died in the morning at 6.05 hours on 11th July, 1990. The evidence adduced by the prosecution may now be briefly discussed.3. On 10th July, 1990, at...

Ratan Ruidas Vs. State of West Bengal

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 2008(4)CHN928

Girish Chandra Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgement dated 26th March, 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Asansol in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2002 arising out of Sessions Case No. 48 of 1999 convicting the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 25(1)(a)/Section 27 of the Arms Act and an order dated 27th March, 2002 by which the appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. No separate sentence, however, was passed under Section 25(1)(a)/Section 27 of the Arms Act.2. The case of the prosecution briefly stated is that on 30th August, 1.995, at about 7.00 p.m., the appellant Ratan Ruidas shot dead the victim, Jiten Ruidas at Chapui Suripukur within the limits of Raniganj PS. He thereafter, stabbed at random and in the process sustained a cut injury in his little finger of the left h...

Gour Gopal Dutta and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Kalidas Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiffs/appellants assailing the judgment and decree passed by learned subordinate Judge, Third Court, Midnapore in Title Appeal No. 196 of 1971 setting aside the judgment and decree passed by learned Munsif, Third Court, Tamluk in T.S. No. 23 of 1970.2. The case of the plaintiffs/appellants, in short, is that the suit properties along with other properties belonged to Sristidhar Kar. While in possession of the suit properties, he died leaving three daughters Kamini, Khiroda and Niroda, each inheriting equal share in the property left by Sristidhar. In the D.S.R.O.R. the properties under Khatian No. 13 & 14 where recorded in the names of three daughters of Sristidhar, but, the properties under Khatian No. 33 were wrongly recorded in the name of Kiranbala who was not at all interested in the suit property. Khiroda died in 1934 leaving the daughter Subhasini. Kamini died leaving daughter Kironbala, Niroda died leaving two s...

Nasha Toys Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Indian Bank and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (2008)4CALLT486(HC)

Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. This application under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India was filed by the defendants of Original Application No. 112 of 1997 being an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'said Act', challenging the order dated 17th October, 2000 passed in the said Original Application being the judgment allowing the application filed by the respondent No. 1 herein, the Indian Bank, under Section 19 of the said Act for recovery of dues amounting to Rs. 28,05,780.18 paise, the order dated 11th September, 2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Kolkata Debts Recovery Tribunal rejecting the Misc. Application No. 33 of 2001 arose out of the prayer for setting aside the ex parte judgment dated 17th October, 2000 passed in Original Application No. 112 of 1997 and the judgment dated 22nd March, 2004 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkat...