Where a complainant alleges threats or offences after charge sheet and trial commencement, the High Court reiterates the duty of police to act on fresh complaints and enables judicial directions to ensure procedural compliance—thus upholding and clarifying procedural precedents. Practical authority for criminal law practitioners in West Bengal.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/23060/2025 of BIMAN BHUNIA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0461732025 |
| Date of Registration | 20-09-2025 |
| Decision Date | 29-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE SUVRA GHOSH |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Precedent Value | Binding within original jurisdiction of Calcutta High Court, persuasive elsewhere |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi |
Once the police have registered a case, completed investigation, and submitted charge sheet, commencement of trial does not bar the complainant from approaching police with subsequent complaints regarding new offences or threats. The police are mandated to consider such complaints, register cases if warranted, and proceed in accordance with law. The High Court is empowered to direct the police to act on such complaints and take consequential steps. This maintains the remedy for continuing offences or fresh incidents connected to pending proceedings. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Initial police refusal to register case, followed by eventual filing of specific case, completion of investigation, submission of charge sheet, and commencement of trial. Petitioner alleged subsequent threats by respondents and claimed police inaction on those threats. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and police authorities within the territorial jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts in similar procedural contexts |
| Follows |
|
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms that aggrieved parties retain the right to approach police with new complaints even after commencement of trial.
- Judicial directions can be sought in writ jurisdiction to compel police to register and investigate new allegations arising post-charge sheet.
- Police are under duty to consider such fresh complaints and take all steps as per procedural law.
- Lawyers can rely on this decision to secure directions for police action when law enforcement is unresponsive to post-charge sheet developments.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that the initial grievance was police inaction in registering a case, which had since been remedied by lodging of the case, investigation, charge sheet, and trial.
- It was brought to the court’s attention that fresh threats had been made against the petitioner after filing of the charge sheet and that the police had failed to act on complaints regarding these threats.
- The High Court clarified the petitioner’s ongoing right to approach police with new complaints and directed that the police authority must consider and register such complaints if appropriate, taking further steps in accordance with law.
- The writ petition was disposed of on the basis of these directions, reflecting the court’s adherence to procedural safeguards for complainants beyond the initial investigation stage.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Initial police refusal to register case on his complaint.
- After charge sheet was filed, petitioner was threatened by private respondents.
- Despite informing police of these threats, no action was taken.
State
- Report submitted that specific case was registered, investigation completed, and trial commenced.
Respondent Nos. 5 to 11
- Arguments not specifically recorded in the judgment extract.
Factual Background
The petitioner originally complained that the police refused to register a case against certain private respondents. Eventually, the police registered a specific case, investigated, completed investigation, filed charge sheet, and the trial began. Subsequently, the petitioner alleged that he was being threatened by the private respondents after the filing of the charge sheet. He claimed to have informed the police of these threats, but alleged no action was taken in response.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment affirms the procedural requirement that police must register and investigate complaints about cognizable offences, including those arising after the commencement of trial in a pending case.
- The court relies on the established principle that fresh offences or incidents can be subject to independent complaints and investigation.
- The scope of writ jurisdiction over police inaction is upheld and clarified.
Procedural Innovations
- The court provided explicit liberty to the petitioner to lodge fresh complaint(s) before the police authority regarding new threats.
- The police were directed to take all necessary and consequential steps in accordance with law on such complaints, reinforcing procedural fairness.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment upholds and clarifies existing procedural law requiring police to register and act on subsequent complaints, and reiterates the High Court’s power to direct police in this regard.