Sri Swapan Pramanik vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 13 May, 2025

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Sri Swapan Pramanik vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 13 May, 2025

13.05.2025
     4
  Ct. No.7
   sdas

                          WPA 5241 of 2022

                              Sri Swapan Pramanik
                                       Vs.
                         The State of West Bengal & Ors.



                 Mr. Tanmay Basu
                 Mr. Manas Adak
                             .....for the petitioner

                 Mr. Anuran Samanta
                          ...... for the respondent nos. 2 & 3

Mr. Tanmoy Sett
Mr. Mehboob Rahman
…… for the respondent nos. 10 to 13

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a

direction upon the concerned respondents to expunge the

Voter Identity Cards of respondent Nos. 10 to 13.

The petitioner, in this writ petition, contends that

private respondent no. 10 misrepresented herself as the

lawful wife of his father, Shri Dhiren Pramanik, since

deceased and on the strength of such misrepresentation,

fraudulently procured an Aadhaar Card, Ration Card, and

Voter Identity Card from the concerned authorities.

Mr. Basu, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of

the petitioner, submits that the aforesaid act is patently

illegal and warrants immediate intervention by this

Hon’ble Court. Accordingly, he prays for an appropriate
2

direction upon the competent authority to cancel and

expunge the Voter Identity Card issued in favour of private

respondent no. 10.

Mr. Samanta, learned advocate appearing for the

Election Commission of India, submits that pursuant to

the complaint lodged by the petitioner, an enquiry was

conducted by the competent authority. During the course

of the enquiry, it was revealed that private respondent no.

10 has been residing in the said locality for the past ten

years, and private respondent nos. 11 to 14 are residing in

that locality for more than one year. He further asserts

that the Voter Identity Cards in question were issued after

following the due process of law, and the authority did not

find any illegality in the issuance of the said Voter Identity

Cards in favour of the aforementioned private

respondents.

Mr. Sett, learned Advocate appearing for

respondent nos. 10 to 13, submits that Dhiren Pramanik

was the husband of Gita Pramanik. During his lifetime,

Dhiren Pramanik executed a Will in favour of Gita

Pramanik, who subsequently applied for the grant of

probate in respect of the said Will. It is only thereafter that

the dispute giving rise to the present writ petition

emerged. He further submits that, pursuant to two

complaints lodged by the petitioner, two criminal cases

have been initiated against respondent nos. 10 to 13. In

one of the said complaints, the petitioner has alleged that
3

the private respondents fabricated a Will with the

intention of unlawfully acquiring the properties left

behind by Dhiren Pramanik.

Heard the learned advocates representing the

parties and perused the materials on record.

The record reveals that a civil proceeding, namely a

probate case, is presently pending between the petitioner

and the private respondents. Furthermore, based on two

complaints lodged by the petitioner, two criminal cases

have been initiated against private respondent nos. 10 to

13 — namely, Egra Police Station Case No. 527 of 2021

dated 10.11.2021 under Sections 120B/467/468/471 of the

Indian Penal Code, and Egra Police Station Case No. 502

of 2021 under Sections 404/448/341/325/506/34 of the

Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, both civil and criminal

proceedings are presently pending between the petitioner

and private respondent nos. 10 to 13.

Admittedly, in order to maintain a writ petition

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the

petitioner must establish the existence of an enforceable

legal right and demonstrate that such right has been

infringed, illegally invaded, or is under threat. In the

present case, the petitioner has failed to produce any

material evidence to show how his existing personal or

legal right has been violated by the action of the

competent authorities in issuing Voter Identity Cards,
4

Aadhaar Cards, and Ration Cards in favour of private

respondent nos. 10 to 13.

Of late, there appears to be a growing tendency,

whenever a civil dispute arises between parties, for one

party to initiate multiple proceedings, including criminal

cases, against the other as a form of reprisal. The present

writ petition seems to be driven more by such retaliatory

motives than by any genuine concern for maintaining the

sanctity of the electoral roll.

Whether Gita Pramanik misrepresented herself as

the wife of Dhiren Pramanik is fundamentally a question

of fact, which is currently pending determination before

the competent court of law. It is important to note that

such a question can only be resolved after evaluating the

evidence to be presented by individuals conversant with

the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, this

disputed question of fact cannot be determined in the

present writ proceeding, which is a summary proceeding.

To accept the petitioner’s contention, this issue would

need to be resolved first. Furthermore, any comment on

this factual issue at this stage may inadvertently influence

the outcome of the ongoing civil and criminal proceedings.

Considering this aspect, I am of the view that no

interference is warranted in this writ petition.
5

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)