In The Matter Of :- Pravat Kumar Ghosh @ Prabhat Kumar Ghosh & Ors vs State

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court be taken on record.

This revisional application under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for transfer of a proceeding in connection with G.R. Case No.574 of 2017 arising out of Sagardighi Police Station Case No.127 of 2017 dated 9.3.2017 under Sections 323/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, now pending before the learned A.C.J.M. Jangipur, to the court of learned C.J.M, Krishnagar.

Learned advocate, Mr. Panda representing the State is present pursuant to the direction earlier given by this Court requiring revisionist to effect service of copy of application upon the opposite party State.

At the instance of de facto complainant, a practising learned advocate of a Jangipur Bar Association, a prosecution came to be generated at Sagardighi Police Station in connection with Sagardighi Police Station Case No.127 of 2017 dated 9.3.2017 alleging commission of offence under Sections 323/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code giving rise to G.R. Case No.574 of 2017 now pending before learned A.C.J.M. Jangipur.

In such Sagardighi Police Station Case the opposite party no.2 was made one of the accused persons therein.

Learned advocate for the revisionist submits that since de facto complainant involved in this case is a practising advocate of Jangipur Court having strong reputation and influence, a fair trial cannot be expected to be held, if allowed to be held at Jangipur Court.

According to revisionist, de-facto complainant attended a proceeding of BL & LRO in connection with Misc.Case No.456/XIII/2016 dated 9.2.2017. The opposite parties involved in such Misc.Case were the son and brother of the revisionist, who under a mistaken view of a situation attacked the de facto complainant, snatched away Rs.5,000/- from him after causing assault on him. The revisionist in order to contest the case first proceeded to obtain anticipatory bail from High Court in connection with CRM 4190 of 2017 and High Court granted accused persons anticipatory bail directing accused persons to surrender. Since the de facto complainant being a practising advocate of Jangipur Bar fell a victim to the incident held in connection with BL & LRO proceeding, the members of the Jangipur Bar Association surprisingly stopped providing legal assistance to revisionist so as to furnish necessary bail bond in terms of the direction of the High Court upon surrendering. The revisionist thereafter, appealed to the Secretary Jangipur Bar Association on 11.8.2017 soliciting apology for the incident with an appeal to the Members of the Jangipur Bar Association to provide them legal assistance enabling the accused persons to furnish bail-bond in terms of the direction of the High Court. Since the local lawyers of Jangipur Court refused to cooperate with the revisionist providing necessary legal assistance to him, and since the revisionist received anonymous phone calls in the meantime with a threat of casing physical injury on them. The revisionist felt reasonable appreciation in his mind that he along with others might be injured in the event of their access in Jangipur Court in order to contest the criminal case, made against the revisionist with others. In this background, the revisionist has sought for transfer of a pending cases from the court of learned A.C.J.M, Jangipur to the court of Learned C.J.M., Krishnagar, not even to any Court situated within the same sessions division.

It is also contended by the revisionist that the case should not have been transferred to Berhampore, Murshidabad on the ground that de facto complainant being a practising advocate has his enough occasion to appear to conduct the cases pending in Jangipur Court, and he has acquaintance with the learned members of the Berhampore Bar Association together with the ministerial staff attached with the court.

Learned advocate representing the State submits that the principle of justice suggests holding of a fair trial at a place causing less inconvenience to either of the parties involved in the case. Thus according to State when the defacto complainant is alleged to have his access both at Jangipur as well as at Berhampore Court in connection with discharge of his duties attached with his profession, the instant case ought not to be transferred to Berhampore Court, though, the same may be situated at a convenient distance to be easily accessible for either of the parties involved in this case.

No document is produced by the revisionist in order to establish that the de facto complainant has his access as a frequent visitors to Berhampore Court in connection with the discharge of his professional function.

There is nothing that the revisionist already took recourse to by causing diary in the General Diary Book of P.S. concerned for the purpose having felt so much apprehension at the instance of defacto complainant.

Though, the case has been sought to be transferred from Jangipur Court to Krishnagar, Nadia, but upon consideration of the distance to be covered from Jangipur to Krishnagar together with the consequent sufferings likely to cause to either of the parties, it would not be reasonable and rational also to transfer the case from Jangipur to Krishnagar, Nadia, as suggested by the learned advocate for the revisionist. However, in the given set of facts without venturing into the merits of the case, justice can be best sub-served to conduct a fair trial, if the case is transferred from the Court of learned A.C.J.M to the court of learned A.C.J.M., Lalbagh, and if that is so done, the comparative harassment would be as minimum as possible.

However, when there is reasonable apprehension of causing physical injury at the instance of de facto complainant, the possibility of holding trial in an atmosphere conducive for fair trial cannot be ruled out.

Learned A.C.J.M, Jangipur is directed to transfer G.R. Case No.574 of 2017 originating from Sagardighi Police Station Case No.127 of 2017 dated 9.3.2017 under Sections 323/379/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code to the court of learned A.C.J.M. Lalbagh within seven days from the date of receipt of communication of this order.

Learned A.C.J.M., Lalbagh is requested to ensure fair trial giving sufficient opportunity to either of the parties involved in this case. It is expected that the de facto complainant will ensure all sorts of cooperation from his end so as to conduct a fair trial.

With this observation/direction, the revisional application stands disposed of.

Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.