IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Jay Sengupta C.R.R. 1510 of 2025 Arjun Singh Vs.

State of West Bengal and Others.

With WPA 7369 of 2025 Arjun Singh Vs.

State of West Bengal and Others.

For the petitioner in CRR 1510 of 2025 : Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee Ms. Sagnika Banerjee Mr. Kaustav Bhattacharya Ms. Sarmistha Basak .....Advocates For the petitioner In WPA 7369 of 2025 : Mr. Billwadal Bhattacharyya, Sr. Adv Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee Ms. Sagnika Banerjee Mr. Kaustav Bhattacharya Ms. Sarmistha Basak .....Advocates For the State in CRR 1510 of 2025 : M r. Kalyan Kumar Bandopadhyay, Sr.

Adv.

Mr. Debasis Roy, Ld. PP M r. Rudradipta Nandy Ms. Sanjana Saha Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh .....Advocates For the State in WPA 7369 of 2025 : Mr. Kalyan Kumar Bandopadhyay, Sr.

Adv.

Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, Ld. APP Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Ld. Sr.

Standing Counsel Ms. Sanjana Saha Mr. Akash Dutta Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh .....Advocates For the UOI : Mr. Arun Kumar Maiti (Mohanty)

Mr. R. R. Mohanty .....Advocates Heard lastly on : 15.07.2025 Judgment on : 24.10.2025 Jay Sengupta, J:

1. While CRR 1510 of 2025 is an application filed by the petitioner, inter alia, seeking quashing of G.R. case No. 1909 of 2025 pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, arising out of Jagatdal PS Case No. 72 dated 27.03.2025 under Sections

126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act, WPA 7369 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner seeking direction upon the police station to register an First Information Report on his complaint dated 26.03.2025. As the two applications were inter connected and pertain to incidents that took place in the same transaction, the two matters were taken up hearing together.

2. Learned senior counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted and has relied on the written notes as follows. The revisional application has been filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the counter case registered against the petitioner and the mala fide manner in which the opposite parties have instituted the present case against the petitioner. It reflected the malevolent intention of the opposite party to malign the petitioner by entangling the petitioner in vexatious proceedings. The complaint was bereft of any ingredients of the allegations leveled against the petitioner under Section 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/109/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 25/27 of the Arms Act by the opposite parties. In the similar manner, the writ petition was filed by the petitioner, being aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent authorities for their action of non-registration of FIR upon the complaint made by the petitioner even when it disclosed cognizable offences. The genesis of the present case began with the incident that happened in the night of 25.03.2025 when two employees/ workers of Meghna jute mill, being Bitto Chowdhury and Md Rashid had a fight due to the political differences amongst themselves. Taking advantage of such fight, local goons reached the said spot. Subsequently, at 5.16 pm, Namit Singh along with his gang members and Md. Firoz arrived at the spot and started firing bullets at the jute mill, thereby targeting the employees and workers of the jute mill and also the house of the petitioner which was about 300 meters away from the said jute mill. They also started hurling bombs at the places in the vicinity of the house of the petitioner. Though the police authorities were present in the place of occurrence, no action was taken by them to curb such action. When the petitioner came to know about such an attack near his house, he came down with his CRPF personnel having Z category security. The petitioner was about to reach the place of occurrence when the miscreants fled away. The entire dispute between Bitto Chowdhury and Md Rashid was noted