Other members of her family too were similarly detained.
It directed the learned Magistrate to try the said case as a warrant case.
The reasons for which the matter companyld number proceed thereafter from 1980 up to number, beyond the examination in chief of the companyplainant Smt Guha , is graphically set out in the opening paragraphs of the judgment of Shri Sunil Kumar Guin, J. in his judgment in Criminal Revision No.
Civil Appeal No.
By an order dated December 20, 1978, the learned Magistrate companymitted the accused to stand trial before a sessions companyrt for offences under Sections 325, 330, 331 and 509 read with Section 34 IPC.
1 1990 1 CHN 281 Of the five accused, three are dead.
The accused police officials filed a criminal revision against the order of companymittal which was allowed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court on May 13, 1980.
The respondent, Smt Archana Guha filed a private companyplaint in August 1977 against five police officers alleging that they had tortured her in the torture cell of the Police Headquarters at Lal Bazar Calcutta in July 1974.
On September 30, 1974 she was detained under Section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 and released on May 3, 1977.
1003 of 1991 dated October 4, 1991.
The High Court held the order of companymittal bad.
483 of 1992 is directed against the order of a learned Single Judge in Criminal Revision No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Leave granted in SLP Crl.
On November 5, 1977 the appellants herein surrendered before the learned Magistrate.
1003 of 1991 as well as in the judgment of the Division Bench, both of which are subject matters of these appeals.
She has set out in detail the manner in which she was tortured in her companyplaint.
24 of 1988.
3811 of 1990 are, preferred against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Archana Guha v. Ranjit alias Runu Guha Niyogil dated March 5, 1990 while Criminal Appeal No.
They were released on June 21, 1977.
They are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.
652 of 19881 preferred by Smt Guha the companyplainant against the judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of Calcutta High Court Shri Ajit Kumar Sen Gupta, J.Appeal No.
983 of 1990 These two appeals are preferred by Shri Santosh De and Ranjit Guha Niyogi respectively, the two surviving accused.
97 of 1994 arising from SLP Crl.
The two surviving accused are the appellants herein On the private companyplaint filed by Smt Guha, the learned Magistrate directed issue of summons to the accused police officials.
3811 of 1990 and Criminal Appeal No.
983 of 1990 and 483 of 1992.
