Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Personal Vendetta Allegations Addressed in Quashing of Criminal Proceedings: Calcutta High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), delivered a judgment on 16th August 2023 that delves into allegations of personal vendetta and false criminal cases. The case, titled “Dr. Sujoy Biswas vs. State of West Bengal & Anr.”, revolved around a Doctor who had alleged a targeted campaign of threats, bodily harm, and false criminal charges.

The court observed, Alleged vendetta by opposite party no. 2 against petitioner – Petitioner’s protest against illegal activities, misappropriation of funds, and corrupt practices – History of conflicts and complaints – Personal vendetta alleged to be motive behind filing false criminal case.

The petitioner, Dr. Sujoy Biswas, a resident of the ‘Vivekananda Samabaya Abashan Samity Ltd.’, had been embroiled in a longstanding battle against alleged mismanagement and corruption within the society. The court noted,Association’s board dissolved by State Government – Personal vendetta alleged to be motive behind filing false criminal case.”

The proceedings also involved a counter case and mediation attempts. The court remarked, “Mediation attempted but petitioner absent on two occasions – Mention of medical reports indicating injuries suffered by complainant.” It was highlighted that the alleged offences were compoundable in nature.

The verdict maintained that there were prima facie materials indicating a need for a trial and dismissed the petitioner’s plea for quashing the proceedings. The judgment emphasized, Criminal revision application seeking quashing of proceedings dismissed – Prima facie materials found in present case against petitioner.”

This judgment, which grappled with personal vendetta allegations, has significant implications for the interpretation of compoundable offences and the role of mediation in such cases. The court’s observation that “Alleged vendetta by opposite party no. 2 against petitioner” sheds light on the complexities of personal motives in legal disputes.

The Calcutta High Court’s ruling underscores the importance of addressing personal vendetta claims within the legal framework while upholding the principle of a fair trial.                           

Date of Decision: 16.08.2023

Dr. Sujoy Biswas vs State of West Bengal & Anr.

Similar News