Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Prasanta Talukder & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 12 June, 2009
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
Form No. J (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Ashim Kumar Roy
C.R.R. No. 959 of 2009
Prasanta Talukder & Ors.
versus
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
For Petitioners : Mr. Navanil De
For State : Mr. Sobhendu Sekhar Roy
Heard On : May 7th, 2009.
Judgment On : 12-06-2009.
The petitioners who have been arraigned as accused, in C.R. Case No. 278
of 2008 now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Dinhata at Cooch Behar, for commission of offences punishable under Sections
448/323/34of the Indian Penal Code, invoking Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure moved this Court with a prayer for transfer of the said case to any other competent Court situated at Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri.
2. Heard Mr. Navanil De, learned advocate for the petitioners as well as Mr. Sobhendu Sekhar Roy, learned advocate for the State. Perused the materials on record.
3. In terms of an earlier order passed by this Court the copy of the application was sent to the complainant, i.e. the opposite party no. 2 herein under registered post with A/D, but the same has been returned unserved with a postal endorsement "refused to accept" which is of course a good service.
4. Mr. Navanil De, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are very near relations of one Tumpa Deb, who is the wife of the complainant/opposite party no. 2. He further submitted that a criminal case relates to the offences punishable under Section 498A and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act instituted by Tumpa Deb against the opposite party no. 2 as well as another case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also instituted by Tumpa Deb claiming maintenance from the said opposite party no. 2 are now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar at Jalpaiguri. Thus, he prays that the aforesaid case being C.R. Case No. 278 of 2008 which is now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata at Cooch Behar, be transferred to the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar at Jalpaiguri where other two cases are pending. He further submitted to attend the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, the petitioners have to undertake a long journey of about 70 (seventy) kilometers from their residence whereas the Alipurduar Court is very close to their house.
On the other hand, Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Counsel for the State strongly opposed the prayer for transfer and submitted that the other two cases which are now pending before the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar are not between the self-same parties, therefore, it cannot be a ground for transfer of the C.R. No. 278 of 2008 now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, Cooch Behar to the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar.
5. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, I find that submissions of Mr. Roy is absolutely correct that both the cases which are pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar at Jalpaiguri and the C.R. No. 278 of 2008, now pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, Cooch Behar are not between the self-same parties. Therefore, pendency of the said two cases before the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar cannot be the ground for transfer of the C.R. No. 278 of 2008 to the said Court from the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, Cooch Behar.
6. Moreover, according to the provision of Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, every offence shall ordinarily be enquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. It appears from the materials on record that the alleged place of occurrence of the aforesaid complaint case is at Dinhata, Cooch Behar and the complainant, as well as his witnesses are all the residents of the said place. I further find as submitted by the Learned Advocate of the petitioners, the distance between the Alipurduar and Dinhata is about 70 kilometers and thus, if the aforesaid case is transferred as prayed by the petitioner, then the complainant and his witnesses have to travel all the way of 70 kilometers to attend the Court but the Court within whose limit the cause of action arose situates near the place of their residence. Thus, it would not be expedient in the interest of justice to transfer the C.R. Case No. 278 of 2008 from the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata, Cooch Behar to the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipurduar, Jalpaiguri.
This criminal revision has no merit and accordingly, stands dismissed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dinhata at Cooch Behar, where the complaint case being No. 278 of 2008 is pending at once.
The Criminal Section is directed to supply the urgent Photostat certified copy of this Judgement within four days from the date of making such application.
( Ashim Kumar Roy, J. )