can sec 5-sandhya mondal

8/19/2019 Can Sec 5-Sandhya Mondal

1/13

District – South 24 Parganas

In the High Court at Calcutta

Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction

C. A. N. of 2013

In the matter of :

C.R.M. No. of 2013

C.A.N. No. of 2013

- And -

In the matter of:

Sandhya Mondal

… Petitioner

- Versus –

The State of West Bengal and

Others

… Opposite Parties

- And –

In the matter of :

An application for condonation of

delay of days in filing application

for restoration;


2/13

← - And –

In the matter of :

Sandhya Mondal

Wife of Sri Sanjib Mondal, residing

at Village - Begumpur, Police

Station -Baruipur, District- South

24 Parganas;

… Applicant

-Versus -

1. The State of West Bengal;

2. Sri Rabin Hazra, Son of Ajit

Hazra;

3. Sri Anil Hazra, Son of Late

Nagendra Nath Hazra,

No. 2 and 3 are both residing at

Village - Begumpur, Police Station -

Baruipur, District – South 24

Parganas;

… Respondents

To,

2


3/13

The Hon’ble Arun Mishra, Chief Justice and His Hon’ble Companion

Justices of the said Hon’ble Court

The humble petition of the petitioner named

above and most respectfully –

Sheweth –

1. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the

Applicant/Petitioner on February 2, 2013 had lodged a

complaint at Baruipur Police Station against Respondent No.s 2

and 3 under Section 376 (2) which has been registered as

Baruipur Police Station Case No. 115 of 2013.

2. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that on 03.02.2013 the

Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 were arrested by the Baruipur Police

authority and on 04.02.2013 both of them were produced before

the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at

Baruipur and the said Learned Court was pleased to remand the

Opposite Party No. 2 and 3 to jail custody. It is pertinent to

mention in this regard that the application for bail as filed by the

3


4/13

Opposite Party No. 2 and 3 was rejected by the said Learned

Court on 04.02.2013.

3. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that on the same day, the

that is on 04.02.2013 the Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 moved the

Learned Sessions Judge at Alipore with a bail application under

section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with

Baruipur Police Station Case No. 115 of 2013 dated 02.02.2013,

which was registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1364 of

2013 wherein Learned Sessions Judge at Alipore, notified the

Learned Public Prosecutor and called for Case Diary of the

proceedings arising out of Baruipur Police Station Case No. 115

of 2013 dated 02.02.2013 and fixed 18.02.2013 as the next date

of hearing.

4. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that on 18.02.2013 when

the Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1364 of 2013 was taken up

for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the Opposite Parties No.

2 and 3 herein to move the said application for bail and as a

result the said application for bail being Criminal Miscellaneous

Case No. 1364 of 2013 was rejected by the Learned Sessions

Judge at Alipore.

4


5/13

5. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that, later it was revealed

that, surprisingly, and significantly, on 05.02.2013, the Opposite

Parties No. 2 and 3, had yet again filed another application before

the same Learned Sessions Judge at Alipore, under section 439 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for bail in connection

with the same proceeding that is Baruipur Police Station Case

No. 115 of 2013 dated 02.02.2013 and the same was registered as

Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1425 of 2013. It is pertinent to

mention in this regard that, upon suppressing the filing of

previous application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure being Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1364 of 2013,

it was specifically affirmed by the Opposite Party No. 2 and 3 in

the said subsequent bail application being Criminal

Miscellaneous Case No. 1425 of 2013 that no previous application

for bail in connection with the same proceeding was pending.

6. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that vide order dated

05.02.2013, the Learned Sessions Judge at Alipore fixed

12.02.2013 as next date of hearing and called for the Case Diary

of the proceedings arising out of Baruipur Police Station Case No.

115 of 2013 dated 02.02.2013. On 12.02.2013, the Learned

5


6/13

Sessions Judge at Alipore was pleased to grant bail to the

Opposite Parties No. 2 and 3 in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.

1425 of 2013.

7. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that being aggrieved by

and dissatisfied with such Order dated 12.02.2013 passed by the

Learned Sessions Judge at Alipore in Criminal Miscellaneous

Case No. 1425 of 2013, the applicant filed this present

application for cancellation of bail of Opposite

Parties/Respondents no. 2 and 3 before this Hon’ble Court being

C.R.M. No. of 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said

application’).

8. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that on … 2013 the said

application for cancellation of bail came up for hearing before the

Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court whereby upon admitting the

application the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court comprising

Hon’ble Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas and Hon’ble Justice Subal

Baidya were pleased to direct Your Petitioner to serve a copy of

the said application to the Opposite Party No. 2 and 3.

9. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that accordingly Your

Petitioner duly served the copy of the said application to the

6


7/13

Opposite Party No. 2 and 3 by speed post with Acknowledgement

Due.

10. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that whenever the instant

matter was called up by the Hon’ble Division Bench, on every

occasion Your Petitioner was duly present and as the Opposite

Party No. 2 and 3 did not appear, on …. The Hon’ble Division

Bench directed Your Petitioner to serve another notice to the

Opposite Parties/Respondents No. 2 and 3. Accordingly on ….

Your Petitioner send a notice to the Opposite Party No. 2 and 3

informing them to present on next occasion of hearing of the

instant application.

11. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that on … June 2013, the

instant case was taken up for hearing by the Division Bench

comprising Hon’ble Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas and Hon’ble

Justice Subal Baidya, however unfortunately, the Learned Lawyer

representing the Petitioner, Mr. Shuvanil Chakraborty, was not

able to remain present before the said Hon’ble Court since he was

engaged in another Court Room in another matter and

consequentially since there was no other representation on behalf

of the Petitioner for this instant case on that time of hearing of

the aforesaid Application for Cancellation of Bail.

7


8/13

12. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that it was later known to

the Petitioner that the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to

dismiss the said Application for Cancellation of Bail for default

since there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner on

the said day that is on ….2013.

13. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that upon coming to know

about such dismissal, immediately the Learned Advocate-on-

Record of the Petitioner contacted the younger brother of the

Petitioner Sanjib, over telephone since the Petitioner does not

have any contact number of her own.

14. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the younger brother

of the Petitioner informed the Learned Advocate-on-Record of

Your Petitioner that the Petitioner is out of the town then and as

soon as she comes back, she will contact the Learned Advocate-

on-Record.

15. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the Petitioner

immediately after coming back to her home contacted the

Learned Advocate-on-Record on ….

8


9/13

16. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the Learned

Advocate-on-Record asked the Petitioner to come before this

Hon’ble Court for affirming the petition.

17. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that accordingly the

Petitioner on September, 2013 affirmed the affidavit in the

application for restoration.

18. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the application for

Cancellation of Bail has been dismissed on .. 2013 and the

restoration application has been filed on ..September, 2013 and

there is a delay of days in filing this restoration application.

19. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that the reason for non-

filing of the restoration within specified time i.e. within 30 days is

beyond the control of the Petitioner.

20. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that unless the delay of

….. days in filing the application for restoration, which is beyond

the control of Your Petitioner, is condoned Your Petitioner will

suffer irreparable loss, prejudice and injury.

9


10/13

21. Your Petitioner most respectfully states that Your Petitioner

respectfully submits that this application is made bona fide and

for the end of justice.

In the above facts and circumstances,

Your Petitioner most respectfully and

humbly prays that Your Lordships would

graciously be pleased to condone the

delay of … days in filing the application

for restoration being C.AN. No. of 2013

and pass such order/orders as the Your

Lordships may deem fit and proper for

the ends of justice.

And for this act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever

pray.

10


11/13

Affidavit

I, Smt. Sandhya Mondal, wife of Sri Sanjib Mondal, aged about -

years, by faith Hindu, by occupation Housewife, residing at Village

-Begumpur, Police Staion - Baruipur, District- South 24 Parganas, do

hereby solemnly affirm and say as follows :

1. That I am the Petitioner of this instant application and am well

conversant with the facts and circumstances of this case and as

such am competent to affirm this affidavit.

2. That the statements made in paragraphs nos. are

true to knowledge of the Petitioner and the statement made in

paragraph nos. are true according to the information

being derived from the Learned Advocate-on-Record of the

Petitioner and rests are my humble submissions before this

Hon’ble Court.

Prepared in my office: Deponent is known to me

Advocate Clerk to : Mr.

Advocate

Solemnly affirm before me on

this the day of September, 2013

11


12/13

Commissioner

District – South 24 Parganas

In the High Court at Calcutta

Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction

C.R.M. No. of 2013

C.A.N. No. of 2013

In the matter of:

An application for Restoration;

-And-

In the matter of:

Sandhya Mondal

…… Applicant/Petitioner

Versus -

State of West Bengal and Others

……

Respondents/Opposite Parties

P e t i t i o n

12


13/13

Mr. Shuvanil Chakraborty, Advocate

Bar Association Room No. 16

High Court, Calcutta

13

can sec 5-sandhya mondal

Documents