Case Law Details
Sushil Kumar Gupta & Ors. Vs State of West Bengal & Anr. (Calcutta High Court)
Learned advocate for the petitioners submits before this Court that the present petitioner No.-3 has resigned from the company as a Director in the year 1994 and the other petitioners have no connection in the alleged occurrence of offence, however the police conducted investigation and submitted a charge sheet. The petitioners have filed one application under Section 239 of CrPC which was turned out by the learned Magistrate. Hence, the criminal revisional application has been preferred.
Heard the learned advocate and perused the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate on August 3, 2018. It appears that the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is a cryptic one and he has no assigned any reason for passing the impugned order. Moreover, the Magistrate must have passed an order in terms of the application filed by the petitioners before him under Section 239 CrPC. It appears before going into the merit of the case that learned Magistrate may be directed to re-hear the matter and disposed of the same by passing a speaking order.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
The instant criminal revisional application has been preferred for setting aside of an order dated August 3, 2018 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 9th Court, Calcutta in connection with G.R. Case No. 2556 of 2010 arising out of Park Street P.S. Case No. 134 of 2010 dated 16.7.2010 under Sections 93(4)(a)/93(4)(c)/93(6)/93(7) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with Sections 403/420/120B/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
