NISITH KUMAR BATABYAL
SUBRTAPATRA – Appellant
Versus
DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT – Respondent
( 1 ) TWENTY-ONE Criminal Revisional Application involving common question of law have been taken up together for orders here. 1a. In Criminal Revision No. 434, of 1994 (Baidyanath Bose and others v. State), the peti tioner No. 1 is the Branch Manager of Hooghly District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. , Haripal Branch. Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are Cultivators. Other petitioners are doing various works. On 8 -4-1983 the Chief Accountant of Hooghly District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. lodged a com plaint at Chinsurah P. S. to the effect that the petitioner No. 2 along with the other petitioners committed cheating in respect of a huge sum of money by way of criminal conspiracy and forg ery of documents. Accordingly, Chinsurah P. S. Case No. 4. dated 8-4-83 was started under Sections 468/420/120b of the IPC The petitioners were granted anticipatory bail by the High Court and some of them surrendered before the Ld. SDJM of 17-6-83 and the rest on 25-6-83. The final report was submitted on 28-2-90. There was a protest-petition filed by the de-facto complain ant. Ultimately the final report was not accepted and the Learned Magistrate directed re-investi gation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.