CHARAN KUMAR MONDAL AND OTHERS DILIP KUMAR SHYAMAL vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR — CRR/2008/2026

Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 482. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 19th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 15-May-2026

CNR: WBCHCA0215852026

Filing Number

CRR/1992/2026

Filing Date

12-May-2026

Registration No

CRR/2008/2026

Registration Date

13-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda

Coram

Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

GROUP C (CRIMINAL MATTERS) ( 3 )

Sub-Category

Quashing of Proceedings ( 75 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL SECTION

Decision Date

19-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

Last updated 29-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Criminal Procedure Section 482
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 Section 329(2)/324(2)/351(2)/3(5)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHARAN KUMAR MONDAL AND OTHERS DILIP KUMAR SHYAMAL

  2. 2.BIPUL MONDAL

  3. 3.NEPAL MONDAL

  4. 4.MALINA MONDAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

  2. 2.RANU MONDAL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 19-May-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Kausik ChandaView PDF

    The court dismissed CRR 2008 of 2026 for default on May 19, 2026. The petitioners' proxy counsel sought an accommodation request on behalf of the advocate on record, but since this was the second call, the court declined the accommodation prayer and dismissed the revision petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 19-May-2026

    New Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda

  4. 18-May-2026

    New Motion

    Hon'ble Justice Kausik Chanda

  5. 15-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 12-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR/2008/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed CRR 2008 of 2026 for default on May 19, 2026. The petitioners' proxy counsel sought an accommodation request on behalf of the advocate on record, but since this was the second call, the court declined the accommodation prayer and dismissed the revision petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case