IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION Appellate Side Present:

The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta C.R.R. 2796 of 2009 With CRAN 8 of 2025 Jiten Chowbey Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr.

For the Petitioner : Mr. Dipankar Dandapath, Adv.

For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Ms. Puja Goswami, Adv. For the State : Mr. Avishek Sinha, Adv.

Heard on : 28.03.2025 Judgment on : 07.05.2025 Ajay Kumar Gupta, J:

1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed by the petitioner challenging the Impugned Judgment and Order dated 23.06.2009 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court – II, Sealdah in Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2009 thereby affirmed the Judgment and Order of conviction dated 30.12.2008 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Sealdah in G.R. Case No. 1144/02 arising out of Phulbagan Police Station Case No. 91 dated 13.06.2002 sentencing him to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for commission of offence under Sections 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The brief facts of the case are essential for the purpose of disposal of this case as under: -

2a. The opposite party no. 2 lodged an FIR with the Officer-in- Charge, Phulbagan Police Station on 13.06.2006 being Phulbagan Police Station Case No. 91 dated 13.06.2002 under Sections 324/114 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner alleging, inter alia, that on 09.06.2002 at about 11.20 hours, the petitioner and some others had assaulted the opposite party no. 2 with fists and blows as well as attacked him with a razor causing bleeding injury on his person.

2b. After culmination of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet and charges were framed against the petitioner for commission of an offence punishable under Sections

324/34 of the IPC.

2c. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Sealdah upon considering the evidence, perusing the materials on record and hearing the submissions of the parties, was pleased to deliver judgment and order of conviction dated 30.12.2008 under Sections

324/34 of the IPC and sentenced the petitioner as aforesaid.

2d. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.12.2008, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court – II, Sealdah being Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 2009. However, upon hearing the appeal, the Learned Judge was pleased to dismiss the appeal by a judgment and order dated 23.06.2009 and affirmed the judgment of the Trial Court.

2e. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 23.06.2009, the petitioner filed this Criminal Revisional application.

Hence, this application.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently argued and submitted that the Learned Trial Court as well as Learned Appellate Court failed to properly appreciate the evidence on record and without applying judicious mind convicted the accused person/Petitioner. It was further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Apart from the above submission, learned counsel further drew attention to this Court that the injured person himself came forward and reconciled with the petitioner. They have interacted amicably and the injured person being de-facto complainant has expressed his desire not to pursue the case any further and does not wish for the petitioner to be convicted.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2/de-facto complainant also conceded the same and further submitted that the Petitioner is his distant relative and he is the only bread earner of his family. He earns minimum income as a daily labour and is responsible for maintaining his family members. Learned counsel candidly submitted that his client is not willing to procee