Central Bureau of Investigation vs Binod Kumar Maheswari

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Cal) 516

BIBHAS RANJAN DE
Central Bureau of Investigation – Appellant
Versus
Binod Kumar Maheswari – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Anirban Mitra, Mr. Manabendranath Bandyopadhyay.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. Lal Mohan Hazra, Mrs. Moutusi Hazra, Mr. Satadru Lahiri, Mr. Sourav Paul.

Table of Content
1. special leave petition context (Para 1 , 2)
2. importance of limitation laws (Para 3 , 4)
3. procedural steps for approval (Para 5)
4. reasons for delay in filing (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
5. opposing arguments against delay (Para 10 , 12 , 13)
6. court's observations on governmental delays (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 41 , 43)
7. judicial approach towards delay condonation (Para 34 , 35)
8. the court concluded that though the delay was concerning, it was sufficient to justify their decision to condone. (Para 42 , 44 , 45)
9. outcome of condonation request (Para 46 , 48)

JUDGMENT :

Bibhas Ranjan De, J.

1. In this case, Central Bureau of Investigation (For short CBI) filed a petition seeking special leave to file appeal against the judgement and order of acquittal of all six (6) opposite parties in connection with special case no. 66 of 2011 arising out of RC No. 05 (A) of 2000 dated 3.2.2000 on an allegation of practicing fraud upon Canara Bank to the tune of approximately Rs. 2.19 crores, under Section 378 (4) of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) along with an application for condonation of delay of 1452 days i.e. almost four years under section 378 (5) of the CrPC.

2. The limited issue

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Cal) 516

BIBHAS RANJAN DECentral Bureau of Investigation – AppellantVersusBinod Kumar Maheswari – Respondent

Cases Referred (45)

BIBHAS RANJAN DE
Central Bureau of Investigation – Appellant
Versus
Binod Kumar Maheswari – Respondent