Krishnendu Das vs. State Of West Bengal
AI Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed a criminal Special Leave Petition challenging a Calcutta High Court order, finding no legal and valid grounds for interference. This means the High Court's decision stands, and the petitioner's challenge at the apex court has concluded.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
Krishnendu Das filed a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) before the Supreme Court, challenging a final judgment and order passed by the High Court of Calcutta on September 5, 2016, in CRR No. 2801/2016. The Supreme Court heard the petitioner's counsel, granted permission to file additional documents, but ultimately found no legal and valid grounds to interfere, leading to the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition.
Timeline of Events
High Court of Calcutta passed final judgment and order in CRR No. 2801/2016.
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) filed in the Supreme Court.
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9285/2016 registered in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court heard the petition, granted permission for additional documents, and dismissed the Special Leave Petition.
Key Factual Findings
There are no legal and valid grounds for interference in the impugned order passed by the High Court of Calcutta.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Questions of Law
Statutes Applied
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioner's counsel was heard, implying arguments were presented challenging the impugned High Court order and seeking the Supreme Court's intervention by demonstrating legal and valid grounds for special leave to appeal.
Respondent's Arguments
While counsel for the respondents were present, the order does not detail their specific arguments. It is inferred they would have argued for the upholding of the High Court's order and against the Supreme Court's interference.
Court's Reasoning
The Supreme Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the relevant material, concluded that it did not find any 'legal and valid ground for interference.' This indicates that the petitioner failed to satisfy the Court that the impugned High Court order warranted the exercise of the Supreme Court's extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136.
- Strict Adherence to Jurisdictional Limits
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.Permission to file additional documents is granted.
- 2.The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
This order is a summary dismissal of a Special Leave Petition, reiterating the Supreme Court's discretionary power under Article 136. It does not lay down any new legal principle or provide detailed reasoning, thus holding very limited precedential value.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Case Registered
Listed On:
28 Nov 2016
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO(S). 9285/2016 (ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 05/09/2016 IN CRR NO. 2801/2016 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA)
KRISHNENDU DAS PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR. RESPONDENT(S) (WITH APPLN. (S) FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND INTERIM RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT)
Date : 07/12/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sayuj Kumar Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Ashwarya Sinha, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
perused the relevant material.
Permission to file additional documents is granted.
We do not find any legal and valid ground for
interference. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
[VINOD LAKHINA] COURT MASTER
[ASHA SONI] COURT MASTER
