Item 16.07. IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA No. 2025 CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

04 APPELLATE SIDE Ct 32 CRR 5355 of 2024 rup Madhuri Banerjee & Ors.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Kalyan Kumar Chakraborty, Mr. Gopal Krishna Sarkar. … for the petitioner.

Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Mrs. Debjani Sahu. … for the State.

Mr. Jayanta Narayan Chatterjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Supreem Naskar, Ms. Jayashree Patra Ms. Ritushree Banerjee, Mr. Bhaskar Mondal. … for the O.P. No.2.

1. All the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties to this revisional application are present.

2. All the parties are ad idem of the fact that in this case a complaint was lodged under Section 156 (3) of the Cr. P.C. (Section 175(3) of BNSS) which lacks compliance of Section 154 (1) and 154(3) of the Cr. P.C. [Section 173(1)

and 173(4) of BNSS].

3. It is also admitted that according to ratio of Priyanka Srivastava Versus State of UP reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287, it is clear that in order to attach the propriety and genuineness to the application preferred under Section 156 (3) of Cr. P.C. [Section 175(3) of BNSS], it ought to be supported with an affidavit so as to justify the set of allegations, which has been leveled