Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
1357/2010 on 6 May, 2010
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
06.05.2010 100 pk CRR No. 1357 of 2010 In Re:- Ajoy Kumar Samanta petitioner Ms. Tuli Sinha for the petitioner Mrs. Krishna Ghosh for the State Heard Ms. Tuli Sinha, learned advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as the Learned Junior Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner who happened to be the defacto complainant of the Kulpi P.S. Case No. 218 of 2007 under Sections 392/397 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, has approached this court for a direction upon the learned trial court for speedy disposal of the Sessions Case No. 2(3) 08, now pending before the Learned Additional District Judge, Diamond Harbour arising out of the aforesaid First Information Report.
It appears from the materials on record that the aforesaid case was registered on 3lst of December, 2007 on the allegations that the petitioner while was returning to his office with a sum of Rs. 3,10,000/- which he collected from the different parties in a public bus a group of miscreants forcible de-boarded him from the bus and snatched away the entire money on the point of fire arms. Police during investigation 2 arrested five miscreants and subsequently submitted charge sheet against them for the self same offence. Thereafter, the aforesaid case was committed to the court of Sessions and the Sessions Case No. 2(3) 08 was registered before the Learned Additional District Judge, Diamond Harbour and on 4th of March, 2008 the learned court received the records but till date no charge could have been framed due to the fact on each day fixed for consideration of question of charge the accused by rotation remain absent in court. Finally on 3rd of December, 2009 when out of five accused persons three were absent, the court issued warrant of arrest against them and fixed March 12, 2010. According to the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner on that day also there was no progress in the trial as the warrant of arrest could not have been executed.
Now, having regards to the materials on record I have no doubt the progress of the trial has been stalled due to the absence of the accused in court, accordingly it is directed, the Learned Additional District Judge, Diamond Harbour before whom the aforesaid case is pending to take all further coercive measures as available under the Code of Criminal Procedure for compelling the appearance of the accused persons in court, if necessary, he should proceed with the trial by keeping the accused persons in jail. 3
The Superintendent of Police, South 24-Parganas as well as the S.D.P.O., Diamond Harbour is directed to take immediate steps for execution of the warrant of arrest against the accused persons and to bring them before the trial court.
The Learned Junior Government Advocate is directed to communicate this order to the concerned police authorities.
It is further directed that after all the accused persons are brought before the court, the learned Judge shall immediately commence the trial and shall take all steps for expeditious conclusion of the trial, preferably within ten months from the date of framing of charge. It is also directed in the event in spite of best efforts the absconded accused could not be apprehended then in that case the court concerned shall have the liberty to invoke Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to split up the case of the absconded accused persons from those who are available before the court and shall proceed against those persons in accordance with law.
This criminal revisional application is, thus, disposed of.
Let a xerox plain copy of this order duly counter- signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be handed over to the Learned Junior Government Advocate for taking necessary steps in this regard. 4
Criminal Section is directed to deliver urgent photostat certified copy of this order to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
(Ashim Kumar Roy,J.)