- (1.) Invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have moved for quashing of a charge-sheet under Sections 406/409/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to Haringhata Police Station Case No. 20 of 2005.
(2.) Mr. Joy Sengupta, the Learned Counsel appearing with Ms. Sreyashee Biswas raised the following points in support of the prayer for quashing; (a) On the face of the allegations made in the First Information Report, no offence can said to have been made out. (b) No property being claimed to have been entrusted to the petitioners there cannot be any question of criminal breach of trust by them. (c) The petitioners not being the public servant, no offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code can said to have been committed by them. In support of his submissions Mr. Sengupta relied on a decision of this Hon'ble High Court in the case of Thakurchak Shilpa Vidyalaya v. State of West Bengal & Ors., 2005 1 CalHN 474. On the other hand, Mr. Swapan Kumar Mullick, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing and submitted that sufficient evidentiary materials have been collected by the police showing complicity of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offences, as such question of quashing of the charge-sheet does not at all arise.
(3.) I have given my anxious and thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. Perused the evidentiary materials containing in the Case Diary which are the foundation of the impugned charge-sheet.;