Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Jagjit Singh vs Unknown on 4 July, 2018
1 16 04.07.2018 C.R.M. 3259 of 2018 Aloke Court 28 & PA In Re : An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In the matter of: Jagjit Singh ...Petitioner Mr. Rupnder Singh Suri, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, Adv.
Mr. Lokman Hossain, Adv.
Mr. Danish Haque, Adv.
Mr. Moyukh Mukherjee, Adv.
Mr. Anirban Dey, Adv.
Mr. Pritam Ray, Adv.
Ms. Mousumi Bhowal, Adv.
... for the petitioner Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, ld. P.P. Mr. Neguive Ahmed, ld. A.P.P. Mr. Pradipta Ganguly, Adv.
... for the State Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently argued that the instant prosecution is a product of malice on the part of the State administration against their client. He draws our attention to a list of dates and argue that due to opposition raised by the petitioner against banning of dance bars in Bidhannagar Commissionerate he has been falsely implicated in a series of cases. In fact, during the hearing of the present bail application another criminal case on similar allegations has been lodged against him and he has been shown arrested therein. It is also argued that in connection with the similar cases being Baguiati P.S. Case No. 1491 of 2016 and Lake Town P.S. Case No. 81 of 2017 the Hon'ble Apex Court was pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, they pray for bail before this Court.
Learned Public Prosecutor submits that dates had already 2 been fixed for examination of the victims but they could not be examined due to circumstances beyond their control. On some dates the local bar was on strike while on another date the presiding officer was absent. He vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that petitioners are influential and moneyed persons with powerful connections and the examination of the vulnerable witnesses may be jeopardized if they are released on bail at this stage.
We have given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions of the parties. The allegation of bias raised by the petitioner relates to the issue of banning of dance bars in Bidhannagar Commissionerate. We note that such ban (subsequently set aside) was not directed against the petitioner's establishments alone but was a ban on all similar establishments. Be that as it may, as the instant case is pending trial and repeated dates were fixed for examination of the victims, we are of the opinion that the present prosecution does not stand on the same footing as the other cases where the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the Apex Court. In those cases the examination of witnesses had not begun. However, the present case is at a delicate juncture when the victims of alleged trafficking are about to be examined. While the right to liberty of an accused is a cherished fundamental right, the necessity of protection of witnesses and fair prosecution are also abiding constitutional duties of the State. To draw a fine balance between the two, we are of the opinion that a sense of urgency ought to be injected in the trial process so that examination of the vulnerable witnesses are completed at an early date.
3
Accordingly, we direct the trial Court to prepone the dates of trial and positively examine the witnesses, namely, Susmita Dhar, Sukhvinder Kaur @ Noor, Anu and Rabin Ghalan, within ten days from date. Prosecution shall make the prayer for preponement before the trial Judge by tomorrow and the trial Judge/Judge-in- Charge shall forthwith prepone the date for examination of witnesses and conclude the same within ten days from date. Examination of the witnesses are to be concluded on a single day and if it is not possible due to circumstances beyond control definitely on the following day. In order to effectuate the trial schedule as directed by us, the trial court would immediately prepone the dates of trial and if the Presiding Officer is not present on the dates so fixed the Judge-in-Charge shall record the deposition of the aforesaid witnesses. Prosecution and the accused persons including the petitioners shall co-operate with the trial Court in order to complete the examination of witnesses as directed.
Trial court shall submit report with regard to the progress in the matter on the next date of hearing.
Let this matter appear under the same heading on 18th July, 2018.
Let photostat plain copy of this order duly countersigned by Assistant Registrar (Court) be handed over to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)