Nirmal Chandra @ Nirmal vs Lic & Ors on 6 April, 2015

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Nirmal Chandra @ Nirmal vs Lic & Ors on 6 April, 2015
Author: Nishita Mhatre
                         1



06.4.2015
Item No. 10
  Ct. No.17
     AB
                             S.A.T. 100 of 2014



              In the matter of: Nirmal Chandra @ Nirmal
                                                 Sonar.
                                - versus -
                                LIC & Ors.


                        Mr. Jiban Ratan Chatterjee
                                      ....for the Appellant

                        Mrs. Soma Roy Chowdhury
                        ...... for the L.I.C./respondents

Mrs. Soma Roy Chowdhury,
learned Counsel appears for the
L.I.C./respondents and notice of appeal is
waived by the respondents.

Mrs. Soma Roy Chowdhury,
learned Counsel is directed to take
instructions from the L.I.C. as to why it
has opposed payment of the amount
insured because it is obvious to us that it
is the L.I.C’s Doctor who has examined the
insured before the policy was issued to
him.

The matter is adjourned to 23rd

April, 2015.

(Nishita Mhatre, J.)

( Asha Arora,J.)
2

An Application For Anticipatory … vs In Re : Madan Biswas @ Madan Kumar … on 13 March, 2015

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Anticipatory … vs In Re : Madan Biswas @ Madan Kumar … on 13 March, 2015
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
                                                                 1

 1028
3.03.2015

sm
CRM No.2290 of 2015

In the matter of an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 10.03.2015 in connection with Krishnaganj P.S.Case No.20 of 2015 dated
11.01.2015 under sections 186/188/34of the Indian Penal Code and sections 21/22/23 of Narcotic
Drug and Psychotropic Substances act, 1985

And

In Re : Madan Biswas @ Madan Kumar Biswas & Anr.

.. Petitioners.


                   Mr.Deep Chaim Kabir         .. for the Petitioners

                   Mr.Navnil De                .. for the State.


This is a case, where the BSF recovered 505 bottles of phensydle from the

house of the petitioners, which is closed to the Indo-Bangladesh Border.

We have gone through the case diary.

Having regard to the nature of allegation and considering the materials

collected in support thereof, in our opinion, this is not a fit for anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, this application for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)

(Ishan Chandra Das, J.)

An Application For Anticipatory … vs In Re : Smt. Mina Rajbanshi on 10 March, 2015

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Anticipatory … vs In Re : Smt. Mina Rajbanshi on 10 March, 2015
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
                                                               1

 1074
0.03.2015

sm
CRM No.2108q of 2015

In the matter of an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 04.03.2015 in connection with Lake Town P.S.Case No.73 of 2014 dated
25.03.2014 under section 381 of the Indian Penal Code.

And

In Re : Smt. Mina Rajbanshi . .. Petitioner

Mr.Rajdeep Mazumder… for the Petitioner

Mr.Sparshamoni Saha Poddar .. for the State.

The petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Lake Town

P.S.Case No.73 of 2014 dated 25.03.2014 under section 381of the Indian Penal

Code, has approached this Court for anticipatory bail.

Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties.

We have gone through the case diary,

Considering the progress of investigation and the materials collected during

investigation in connection with the case, which was registered in the month of

March 2014, about a year back, we do not think any fruitful purpose will be served

by taking the petitioner into custody. Accordingly, the petitioner’s prayer for

anticipatory bail stands allowed.

In the event of arrest of the petitioner in connection with the aforesaid case,

she shall at once be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer
2

upon furnishing a Bond of Rs.5000/- on condition that after release, she shall

surrender before the concerned court within two weeks thereafter.

This order is subject to the conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)

(Ishan Chandra Das, J.)

M.D Narendra Nath Das vs North Bengal State Transport on 25 February, 2015

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
M.D Narendra Nath Das vs North Bengal State Transport on 25 February, 2015
Author: Sanjib Banerjee
                                           1



AD-54
February 25, 2015
                           W.P.No.5035 (W) of 2015

m.d                             Narendra Nath Das
                                      Vs.
                               North Bengal State Transport
                               Corporation and others



                    Mr. Subrata Das
                               ... for the petitioner


                    Mr. Pradyumna Sinha

                                .. for N.B.S.T.C.
                                (vakalatnama not supplied)

                    Mr. Syamal Kumar Das

                                .. for the State


                           The petitioner claims the retiral benefits

                    due to the petitioner upon the petitioner's

                    superannuation on December 31, 2014.

                           It    is   submitted     on    behalf   of     the

                    respondent        corporation      that    since      the

corporation is in serious financial difficulties and

depends completely on the State government to

provide funds to it, an appropriate direction

should be issued to the State government.

W.P. No. 5035 (W) of 2015 is disposed of

by directing the Managing Director of the

respondent corporation to consider the propriety

of the petitioner’s claim and to make a

recommendation to the State government on the

basis thereof within a period of eight weeks from
2

date. If the recommendation is for any money to

be paid to the petitioner, such recommendation

should be forwarded to the Secretary,

Department of Finance for the State to ensure

that adequate funds are made available to the

corporation to clear the dues of the petitioner

within a period of five months from date. The

petitioner will be entitled to interest at the rate

of 7% per annum from the month following the

petitioner’s superannuation till the date of

payment if the petitioner’s payment is made

within five months from date. If the payment is

delayed, the petitioner will be entitled to interest

at the rate of 10% per annum on the principal

sum due for the period beyond five months.

There will be no order as to costs.

Certified website copies of this order, if

applied for, be urgently made available to the

parties, subject to compliance with all requisite

formalities.

(Sanjib Banerjee, J.)
3

M.D Narendra Nath Das vs North Bengal State Transport on 25 February, 2015

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
M.D Narendra Nath Das vs North Bengal State Transport on 25 February, 2015
Author: Sanjib Banerjee
                                           1



AD-54
February 25, 2015
                           W.P.No.5035 (W) of 2015

m.d                             Narendra Nath Das
                                      Vs.
                               North Bengal State Transport
                               Corporation and others



                    Mr. Subrata Das
                               ... for the petitioner


                    Mr. Pradyumna Sinha

                                .. for N.B.S.T.C.
                                (vakalatnama not supplied)

                    Mr. Syamal Kumar Das

                                .. for the State


                           The petitioner claims the retiral benefits

                    due to the petitioner upon the petitioner's

                    superannuation on December 31, 2014.

                           It    is   submitted     on    behalf   of     the

                    respondent        corporation      that    since      the

corporation is in serious financial difficulties and

depends completely on the State government to

provide funds to it, an appropriate direction

should be issued to the State government.

W.P. No. 5035 (W) of 2015 is disposed of

by directing the Managing Director of the

respondent corporation to consider the propriety

of the petitioner’s claim and to make a

recommendation to the State government on the

basis thereof within a period of eight weeks from
2

date. If the recommendation is for any money to

be paid to the petitioner, such recommendation

should be forwarded to the Secretary,

Department of Finance for the State to ensure

that adequate funds are made available to the

corporation to clear the dues of the petitioner

within a period of five months from date. The

petitioner will be entitled to interest at the rate

of 7% per annum from the month following the

petitioner’s superannuation till the date of

payment if the petitioner’s payment is made

within five months from date. If the payment is

delayed, the petitioner will be entitled to interest

at the rate of 10% per annum on the principal

sum due for the period beyond five months.

There will be no order as to costs.

Certified website copies of this order, if

applied for, be urgently made available to the

parties, subject to compliance with all requisite

formalities.

(Sanjib Banerjee, J.)
3

Sri Sakti Pada Samanta vs Unknown on 19 December, 2014

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Sakti Pada Samanta vs Unknown on 19 December, 2014
Author: Tapan Kumar Dutt


C.R.M. 11631 of 2014
In Re : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
filed on 29.8.2014 in connection with the G.R. Case No. 2448 arising out of the Belda P.S. Case
No. 174 of 2014 dated 04.07.2014 under Sections 448/341/323/325/506/34/354 of the Indian
Penal Code.



In the matter of : Sri Sakti Pada Samanta
                                     ... Petitioner

Mr. Sk. Sahjahan Ali    ... for the Petitioner

Ms. Sonali Das    ... for the State


It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is implicated

in this case on false allegation.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the State, who submits that the

injury sustained by the victim is simple in nature.

On consideration of the materials available in the case diary, we are of the

view that there is no need for custodial interrogation of the petitioner.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner ( Sri Sakti

Pada Samanta ) shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 5,000/-

with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Paschim Medinipur, subject to the conditions as laid down under

Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application for anticipatory bail is disposed of.

( Tapan Kumar Dutt, J. )

( R. K. Bag, J. )

97/2014 on 11 November, 2014

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
97/2014 on 11 November, 2014
Author: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee
                                                          1



    S/L. 15
November 11, 2014.
      ss.                                     F.A.T. 97 of 2014

                                           Re: CAN 10472 of 2014 (sec. 5)
                                             CAN 8439 of 2014 (injunction)

                              Mr. Partha Pratim Roy,
                              Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal           ...for the appellant.


                              The appellant is directed to serve copies of the application
                     for condonation of delay and the application for injunction on the
                     respondents by registered post           with acknowledgement due

intimating that these applications shall appear after four weeks and
file affidavit of service on the next date of hearing.

During pendency of the application for condonation of
delay the trial court may proceed with the final decree
proceeding, but shall not pass the final decree without the leave of
this court.

(Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.)

(Subrata Talukdar, J.)

Prasun Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 25 September, 2014

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Prasun Das vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 25 September, 2014
Author: Dipankar Datta
                                                     1



36   25.9.14               W. P. No. 26679 (W) OF 2014
                                         ---------------

Sc
Prasun Das

-vs.-

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Debasis Sur
…..For the Petitioner.
Mr. Pantu Deb Roy
Mr. Vinit Kr. Das
….For the State.

To enable Mr. Deb Roy, learned advocate for the State to
obtain instructions on the status of the application for
recognition filed by the petitioner, hearing of this writ petition
stands adjourned.

ACO Put it up under the heading ‘To Be Mentioned’ on 31st
October, 2014.

(Dipankar Datta,J.)

Sahidul Islam @ Manik Sk vs Unknown on 27 August, 2014

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Sahidul Islam @ Manik Sk vs Unknown on 27 August, 2014
Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay


1

27/08/2014
(554)
(Ct. no. 11)
ARDR

CRM 10235 of 2014
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure filed on 14th August, 2014 in connection with
Katwa P.S. Case no. 252 of 2014 dated 07/07/2014 under Sections
135(i)(a)(b) of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Amendment Act, 2007.

And

In the matter of: Sahidul Islam @ Manik Sk.

…Petitioner.

Mr. Sarba Nanda Sanyal,
…for the Petitioner.

Mr. Rananjay Chatterjee,
…for the State.

Mr. Aniket Mitra,
…for the WBSEDCL.

ALLOWED

Heard the learned Advocates of both the parties.

Having considered the materials in the case diary produced before

us, we are of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is

not necessary. There is no chance of abscondence of the petitioner.

We are, therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for

granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall

be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three

Thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the

arresting officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus disposed of.

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.)

<

(Sudip Ahluwalia, J.)

Kc Sisir Kumar Mukherjee vs The Cesc Limited & Ors on 12 June, 2014

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Kc Sisir Kumar Mukherjee vs The Cesc Limited & Ors on 12 June, 2014
Author: Aniruddha Bose
                                                1




   14                         W.P. No. 9540(W) of 2001
12.06.2014

KC Sisir Kumar Mukherjee
Vs.

The CESC Limited & Ors.

Mr. Subrata Biswas.

… for the CESC Limited.

No one appears for the petitioner.

The writ petition is dismissed for default.

Interim order, if any, shall stand vacated.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

(Aniruddha Bose, J.)
2