Court In Its Own Motion vs State Of West Bengal

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Cal) 206

T. S. SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Court In Its Own Motion – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Pramit Kumar Roy, Ld. Sr. Adv., Mr. Smarajit Roy Chowdhury, Adv., Mr. Kalyan Kumar Chakraborty, Adv., Mr. Dip Jyoti Chakraborty, Adv., Mr. Ajit Mishra, Adv., Mr. Rajendra Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Atmaja Bandyopadhyay, Adv., Mr. Goutam Malik, Adv., Ms. Madhumita Basu, Adv., Mr. Manabendranath Bandhopadhyay, Adv., Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv., Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv., Mr. Niladri Saha, Adv., Mr. Debashis Basu, Adv., Mr. Alakh Alok Srivastava, Ms. Aparajita Mitra, Adv., Ms. Sanjukta Samanta, Ms. Priyanka Tibrewal, Mr. Kalyan Chakraborty, Mr. Subas Ray, Adv., Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar, Adv.
For the Respondent:Mr. Kishore Dutta, Ld. Advocate General, Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Adv., Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Adv., Mr. Biswabrata Basu Mallick, Adv., Mr. Tarak Karan, Adv., Mr. Debangshu Dinda, Adv., Mr. Ritesh Kumar Ganguly, Adv., Mr. S.V. Raju, Ld. A.S.G., Mr. Dhiraj Trivedi, Ld. DSGI., Mr. Arijit Chakraborty, Adv., Ms. Debjani Roy, Adv., Mr. Samrat Goswami, Adv., Mr. Ankit Khanna, Adv., Ms. Swapna Jha, Adv., Ms. Supriti Sarkhel, Adv., Ms. Sohini Dey, Adv., Mr. Sunil Gupta, Adv., Mr. Ashok Kumar Chakraborti, Mr. Arun Kumar Maity, Adv., Ms. R. Bothra, Adv., Mr. Tirtha Pati Acharya, Adv., Mr. Amajit De, Adv., Mr. Ashok Kumar Chakraborti, Ld. A.S.G.I., Mr. Arun Kumar Maity, Adv., Mr. Amajit De, Adv., Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, Adv.,
Ms. Susmita Saha Dutta, Adv., Mr. B. Mukherjee, Adv., Mr. Avik Ghatak, Adv., Mr. Gaurav Dutta, Adv., Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, Ld. DSG, Mr. Suryaneel Das, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

T.S.SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, JJ.

1. WPA 4011 of 2024 was taken up as a suo motu writ petition by Hon’ble Single Bench of this court and by order dated 12.02.2024 the court recorded its gross disappointments after going through several newspapers and electronic media wherein it had been reported that number of ladies in Sandeshkhali, North 24 Parganas have been sexually assaulted at gun point. The court also observed that it has been alleged in the newspapers that the tribal lands were taken away forcibly in violation of all legal formalities and laws. The learned Public Prosecutor was present in court and submitted that the learned Advocate General of the State is an appropriate person who will address the court and satisfy the queries that may be raised. With these observations, the court was constrained to take suo motu cognizance over the alleged incidents and also appointed learned amicus curiae to assist the court. The matter was placed before the Chief Justice and by administrative order dated 28.02.2024, the order passed by the learned Single Bench dated 12.02.2024 was treated as a report in terms of the Rule 59 of the Rules Relating to Applications under

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Cal) 206

T. S. SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYACourt In Its Own Motion – AppellantVersusState Of West Bengal – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

T. S. SIVAGNANAM, HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Court In Its Own Motion – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent