Bharati Tamang vs Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(HC) 9

Subhendu Samanta, J
Bharati Tamang – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Kaushik Gupta, Adv., Mr. Arnab Mukherjee,Adv., Ms. Shreyasi Manna Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anirban Mitra, Mr. Sayan De, Adv., Mr. Kaustn Shome, Adv., Mr. Rimik Chakraborty, Adv., Mr. Sayan Kanjilal Adv.

Table of Content
1. evidentiary grounds necessitate the framing of charges in a conspiracy case. (Para 1 , 5 , 30)
2. the background and context of the murder provide critical evidence against the accused. (Para 2 , 6 , 20)
3. the claims regarding witness testimonies raise substantial doubts about the discharge order. (Para 3 , 8 , 12 , 13)
4. the standards for determining sufficient grounds for charges were discussed, emphasizing judicial discretion. (Para 4 , 10 , 22 , 26)

1. Both the criminal revisions are preferred against order dated 17th August 2017 passed by the Learned Chief Judge City Sessions Court Calcutta in SC Case No. 128 of 2013 arising out of Sadar Darjeeling PS Case No. 89 of 2010 also arising out of CBI Case No. RC 1(S/20111 KOL) corresponding to GR Case No. 148 of 2010 u/s 147/148/149/427/506/302 read with Section 34/120B of IPC.

2. The brief fact of the case is that One Madan Tamang, a political leader of Darjeeling and the then president of All India Gorkha League (would be referred as AIGL hereinafter), a Political Party in Darjeeling was murdered in brought day light at Darjeeling Mall on 21.05.2010. One Laxman Pradhan lodged Fir with the OC Darjeeling PS on a same

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(HC) 9

Subhendu Samanta, JBharati Tamang – AppellantVersusCentral Bureau of Investigation & Anr. – Respondent

Subhendu Samanta, J
Bharati Tamang – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. – Respondent