District :
South 24 Parganas.
In the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, at
Alipore, South 24 Parganas.
Nodakhali
Police Station Case no. 118 of 2010.
State
of West Bengal
_____Complainant
Shri
Mantulal Gayen
_____Defacto Complainant
-
Versus -
Shri
Prabir Das, and others
_______Accused
NARAZI PETITION Against the discharge of
accused Kartik Das, Son of Late Bhim Chandra Das, residing at Shyampur
Ghoshpara, Police Station Maheshtala, South 24 Parganas, in Charge Sheet number
90 / 2016, dated 16-03-2016.
The
humble petition of the above named Defacto Complainant, Shri Mantulal Gayen,
most respectfully;
Sheweth as
under :
1.
That
the defacto complainant submits that vide order dated 08-10-2015, the Learned
Court direct for the reinvestigation of the present criminal proceeding in
terms of the direction of the Learned 3rd Court of the Additional
Session Judge, at Alipore, South 24 Parganas, the extract of the said order
dated 08-10-2015, is as follows “ In view of the order passed by Ld. Additional
Session Judge, Alipore, in Criminal Motion no. 250 of 2012, the prayer of
defacto complainant praying for further investigation is allowed. O/C Nodakhali
PS is directed to further investigate the case himself or any other senior
officer except the previous I.O. Fix 07-01-2016 for further report from PS
inform surety for accused. CD be return.”
2.
That
the defacto complainant submits that on 02-08-2016, the Charge Sheet no. 90 of
2016, dated 16-03-2016, under Section 448, 324, 326, 120B, 302, and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code’ 1860, against the accused 1) Prabir Das, 2)Nabin Das, 3)
Rabin Das, 4) Bula @ Archana Das, 5) Jayanti Das @ Doli, 6) Rina Das, and 7)
Mallika Das, and another charge sheet submitted against JCL 1) Tanmoy Das, and
2) Raja @ Pappu Das, and further I.O. prays for discharging FIR name accused
Kartik Das.
3.
That
the defacto complainant reproduced the facts lead to FIR against the accused
persons :
a)
That
on 08-05-10, at about 9.45 p.m. the accused persons having criminally conspired
and having been driven out by their grudge towards defacto complainant’s
father, criminally trespassed into the house of deceased Nitai Chandra Gayen (
father of defacto complainant ), breaking open the main gate as well as the
inner entrsance door of it accompained with deadly weapons including bhoja;li,
iron rod, cricket bat, wicket, tashla ( bolt of door ), etc. and with the
intention to kill parents of defacto complainant, when they entered upto first
floor breaking the inner door, the defacto complainant, his father, mother
tried to resist them but they started assaulting them by tashla and other
weapons and the defacto complainant, any how escaped from the house and rushed
to the Birlapur T.P.O.P. of Nodakhali Police Station, for help but the Police
personnel, specially one S.I. namely “P.Sur Roy” did not at all entertain him
and abused him with filthy languages.
b)
That
the said police personnel “ P.Sur Roy” detained the defacto complainant on that
day and time and releasing him at about 12-30 a.m.
c)
That
in the mean time the accused severely assaulted and injured defacto
complainant’s parents and stabbed them by iron rod and broken down the head of
his mother namely Sailabala Gayen, in such situation defacto complainant’s
father seeing no other alternative for survival tried to escape to roof of his
house but the accused no.2, 4, and 5, caught hold of him on stair connecting to
1st floor and 2nd floor and whereas the accused no. 1,
hit on his head by Tashla with full force in consequences of which his head
cracked and he fell down. Thereafter the accused no.1, stabbed his head
repeatedly by a “Bhojali” in consequences of which he died instantly. However
when the accused no.1, 2, and 5, were killing complainant’s father her mother
in her blood stained condition even tried to rescue her husband and was
crawling to come near to her husband but could not reached and the accused
having seen her crawling decided to kill her also hit on her head with Tashla
and consequently her body also became calm.
d)
That
it may be mentioned that when the accused were killing Netai and Sailabala,
defacto complainant’s brother’s son hide himself behind the guard wall of the 2nd
floor’s stair room and they could not gather courage to resist them but saw
everything.
e)
That
while the parents of the defacto complainant were brought to the Muchisa Health
Centre and Hospital his father was declared to be dead there and her mother was
forwarded to Bangur Hospital and thereafter to S.S.K.M. Hospital
f)
That
it may be mentioned that when the accused were killing defacto complainant’s
parents, his father continuously called the Birlapur T.P.O.P. from his TATA
phone, vide phone no. 033-65183107, for help but even after receiving calls
they disconnected the line every time, and ultimately he was brutally killed
without any sort of help from Police, by the accused, who laughed on him in
loud voice, preaching that no police will come and help.
g)
That
however after the aforesaid massacre was over Police came along with the said
P.Sur Roy, S.I. of Police at about 12.30 a.m. on 09-05-2010, and when written
complaint stating all the aforesaid facts were tendered to the said P. Sur Roy,
he after going through it torn the same and filthy abusing the defacto
complainant and his other relatives compelled one Ranjan Gayen being cousin of
the complainant to write F.I.R. deleting the facts and thereafter compelled the
defacto complainant to put his signature upon such another written F.I.R. and
thereafter a case has been registered by the Police, more astonishingly, under
Section 304 of I.P.C.
h)
That
the said Kartik das, husband of Bula @ Archana Das, was present at the place
and time of occurrence, and cause several act and omission to put to death to
the victim Netai Gayen and shilabala gayen, with his wife Bula @ Archana Das, though the I.O. prayed
for discharge his name from the charge sheet.
4.
That
the defacto complainant beg to states that the said Kartik das, husband of Bula
@ Archana Das, was present at the place and time of occurrence, and cause
several act and omission to put to death to the victim Netai Gayen and
shilabala gayen, with his wife Bula @
Archana Das, though the I.O. prayed for discharge his name from the charge
sheet, showing the ground that he was admitted to Esi Hopspital since
06-05-2010 to 10-05-2010, relying on piece of a xerox papers and without
enquiring in such aspect with ESI Hospital, as such there is no statement of
ESI Hospital, so far has ever been placed and or obtained by the Investigating
officer, and therefore a reasonable apprehensions raised into mind of the
defacto complainant as of the authentication of such xerox papers which has
never been verified with the concern authority of ESI Hospital, so far. Thus the
defacto complainant seeks for further investigation into this limited aspects
by the Officer in Charge of Police or by the another Senior Police Officer of
the Nodakhali Police Station, in the interest of administration of justice.
5.
That the defacto complainant beg to states
that the name of the said kartik das has been recorded by the SSKM Hospital
authority concern from the mouth of the victim Sailabala Gayen, while she
produced for emergent treatment, by the police personnel concern, therefore the
discharge of the said accused person, is a fatal of investigation and thus the
defacto complainant seeks for further investigation into this limited aspects
by the Officer in Charge of Police or by the another Senior Police Officer of
the Nodakhali Police Station, in the interest of administration of justice.
6.
That
unless the Learned Court direct for the further investigation into this limited
aspects by the Officer in Charge of Police or by the another Senior Police
Officer of the Nodakhali Police Station, in the interest of administration of
justice, the defacto complainant will highly prejudice and suffer with
irreparable loss and injury, thereof.
7.
That
the balance of convenience and inconvenience are in favour of the defacto
complainant and the accused will not prejudice.
8.
That
this application is made bonafide, in the interest of administration of
justice.
It is therefore prayed that Your
Honour would graciously be pleased to allow this application and direct for the
further investigation into this limited aspects of the accused namely Kartik
Das, and his admission into Esi Hospital, so far for the period 06-05-2010 to
10-05-2010, by the Officer in Charge of Police or by the another Senior Police
Officer of the Nodakhali Police Station, in the interest of administration of
justice, and or to pass such other necessary order or orders or further order
or orders, as your Honour may deem, fit, and proper for the end of justice.
And for this
act of kindness, the Petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray.
Affidavit
I, Shri
Mantulal Gayen, Son of Late Nitai Chand Gayen, aged about _____years, by faith
Hindu, by Occupation Service, residing at Village Alampur Kalitala, Police
Station – Nodakhali, District – South 24 Parganas, do hereby solemnly say and
affirm as follows :
1.
That
I am the defacto complainant in the present Criminal proceeding being Nodakhali
Police Station Case no. 118 of 2010. I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.
That
the contents of paragraph number _________ to __________, are true to my
knowledge, and the rests are my humble submissions before the Learned Court.
The
above statements are true to my knowledge and belief.
DEPONENT
Identified
by me,
Advocate
Prepared
in my Chamber,
Advocate
Date
: __________________2018
Place
: Alipore Criminal Court.
NOTARY
Comments
Post a Comment