Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Tapasi Mondal vs The State Of West Bengal on 19 March, 2026
19.3.2026
3
sb
CRR 420 of 2026
Tapasi Mondal
Vs.
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Navanil De
Mr. Subhrajit Dey …for the Petitioner
This is an application wherein the petitioner has prayed
for quashing of the impugned proceeding being G.R. case no.
2744 of 2022, presently pending before the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Purba Midnapore at Tamluk.
The petitioner herein is implicated under Sections
143/147/149/186/283/323/353/427/120B of the IPC read
with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property
Act, 1984 read with Section 9 of the West Bengal Maintenance
of Public Order Act, 2017 read with Section 8B of the National
Highway Act, 1956.
The allegation against the petition is that on 13th
September, 2022, supporters of the political party including the
present petitioner organized a rally violating Section 144 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure around Nabanna and despite prior
police warnings to refrain from the programme, the participants
proceeded with the march.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid proceeding, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that in the suo motu
complaint, the opposite party no. 1 failed to establish a
2
common object as required under Section 149 of the IPC and
the allegation under Section 186 of the IPC are barred as the
mandatory procedure under Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure was not followed. No specific overt act has
also been alleged against the present petitioner for alleged use
of criminal force and the investigation report does not disclose
any prior meeting of minds to commit any illegal act. He further
submits that Section 8B of the National Highway Act has been
misplaced in this case. The petitioner being an Indian citizen,
has a fundamental right to make rally under Article 19(1)(b) of
the Constitution of India. During investigation, no weapon or
incriminating materials was seized from the petitioner and
therefore, further continuance of the instant proceeding against
the petitioner, who is an MLA, Haldia will be mere abuse of
process of the court.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the
application is admitted.
Petitioner is directed to serve a copy of the application
upon the State though the office of Public Prosecutor, High
Court, Calcutta.
Let the matter appear in the Monthly list of June, 2026
under the heading “Contested Application”.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for interim
relief.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and that
the petitioner had made out an arguable case which requires
adjudication on merit, let the impugned order dated 19th July,
3
2025, which only pertains to the issuance of warrant of arrest
against the petitioner, is hereby stayed for a period of twelve
weeks or until further order, whichever is earlier.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, duly
applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all
requisite formalities.
(Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)