Smt. Angana Malik vs Sri Soumyajyoti Mullick, Sri Baladeb Mullick and others — 32/2025
Case under Code of Criminal Procedure Section 397, 399. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 04th May 2026.
Criminal Revision
CNR: WBHG050006072025
Filing Number
257/2025
Filing Date
05-Apr-2025
Registration No
32/2025
Registration Date
05-Apr-2025
Court
Additional District Judge, Serampore, Hooghly
Judge
1-Addl District and Sessions Judge II
Decision Date
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 26-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Smt. Angana Malik
Adv. Partha Sarathi Sain
Respondent(s)
-
1.Sri Soumyajyoti Mullick, Sri Baladeb Mullick and others
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge dismissed Criminal Motion 32 of 2025, holding that the revision petition had become infructuous as the underlying trial had already concluded with an acquittal judgment on 10.10.2025. The court reasoned that once a trial concludes and judgment is delivered, the trial court becomes functus officio, and Section 173(8) CrPC cannot be invoked to reopen concluded trials or circumvent acquittal judgments, rendering no effective relief available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-May-2026
Disposed
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
12-Mar-2026
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
12-Mar-2026
Order
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
15-Dec-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
15-Dec-2025
Lcr
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
22-Sep-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
22-Sep-2025
Lcr
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
08-Aug-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
08-Aug-2025
Show Cause
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
02-Jun-2025
Copy of OrderView PDF
-
02-Jun-2025
Requisite of File
Addl District and Sessions Judge II
-
05-Apr-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Apr-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 32/2025
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge dismissed Criminal Motion 32 of 2025, holding that the revision petition had become infructuous as the underlying trial had already concluded with an acquittal judgment on 10.10.2025. The court reasoned that once a trial concludes and judgment is delivered, the trial court becomes functus officio, and Section 173(8) CrPC cannot be invoked to reopen concluded trials or circumvent acquittal judgments, rendering no effective relief available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts