Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Kakali Rani Majumdar @ Kakali Dey vs State Of West Bengal & Anr on 18 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
(Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction)
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul)
CRR 1131 of 2020
With
CRAN 1 of 2020
(Old No. CRAN 4469 of 2020)
With
CRAN 2 of 2020
(Old No. CRAN 4470 of 2020)
Kakali Rani Majumdar @ Kakali Dey
Vs
State of West Bengal & Anr.
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das,
Ms. Suranjana Bhattacharyya.
For the State : Mr. Arijit Ganguly,
Mr. Sanjib Kumar Dan.
For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Sourav Chatterjee,
Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwal.
Hearing concluded on : 22.08.2023
Judgment on : 18.09.2023
2
Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:
1.
The present revision has been preferred against Order No. 5 dated 30th
January, 2017 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Hooghly at
Chinsurah in connection with Criminal Misc. Case No. 2451 of 2016
being a proceeding under Section 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 filed in connection with Sessions Case No. 49 of 2015 previously
pending in the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast
Track, Chandannagore, District-Hooghly corresponding to
Chandannagore Police Station Case No. 198 of 2014 dated 12th
November, 2014 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
corresponding to G.R. No. 1461 of 2014 which culminated in Charge
Sheet No. 17 of 2015 dated 28th February, 2015 under Sections 306/34
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and presently pending in the Court of the
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Hooghly at Chinsurah
where it has been renumbered as Special Case No. 9 of 2017.
2. The petitioner's case is that she is the daughter-in-law of the opposite
party no. 2 and is a victim of a false case. That the son of the opposite
party no. 2 received accidental burn injuries while preparing some food
in a stove and ultimately died. As the son of the opposite party no. 2 had
married the petitioner herein against his wish, the opposite party no. 2
had never accepted the said marriage between his son and the petitioner
so they had to live in a separate house.
3. That the only son of the opposite party no. 2 died under unnatural
circumstances, succumbing to severe burn injury and based on such
incident, on the basis of the Written Complaint lodged by the opposite
party no. 2, addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Chandannagore, Police
Station, District - Hooghly, Chandannagore Police Station Case No. 198
of 2014 dated 12th November, 2014 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 corresponding to G.R. No. 1461 of 2014 was started by
the police authorities against the Petitioner which was pending in the
Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandannagore, District - Hooghly.
4. Charge Sheet was submitted by the Criminal Investigation Department,
Government of West Bengal before the Court of the Learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandannagore, District - Hooghly under
Sections 306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioner
being No. 17 of 2015 dated 28th February, 2015.
5. The Court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Chandannagore, District - Hooghly took Cognizance and committed the
said case to the Court of Sessions wherein it was numbered as Sessions
Case No. 49 of 2015 and was transferred to the Court of the Learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Chandannagore, District -
Hooghly for trial and disposal.
6. The petitioner states that prior to framing of charge as against the
petitioner which would commence the Trial in connection with the said
Criminal Proceeding, the opposite party no.2 on 1st August, 2016 had
filed a petition under Section 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 before the Court of the Learned Sessions Judge, Hooghly at
Chinsurah which was registered as Criminal Misc. Case No. 2451 of
2016 (hereinafter called & referred to as the said Petition) inter-alia
praying for transfer of the said Criminal Proceeding from the Court of the
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Chandannagore, District
- Hooghly to any Court in Chinsurah, so that the opposite party no. 2
and the other witnesses can be able to adduce evidence fearlessly.
7. It was further alleged that while the petitioner was in custody she
developed a relationship with a notorious criminal of the locality who was
also in custody in connection with murder cases and NDPS cases and
ultimately on the prayer of the Controller, Chandannagore Sub-
Correctional Home, she was shifted to Chinsurah Correctional Home vide
Order dated 5th January, 2015 passed by the Court of the Learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandannagore, District - Hooghly.
8. On 10th November, 2016 the matter was heard by the Learned Sessions
Judge, Hooghly at Chinsurah and 30th January, 2017 was fixed for
further hearing of the same.
9. That on 30th January, 2017 which was the date fixed for further hearing
of the matter, and none of the parties took steps in the instant case, on
the basis of the hearing made on 10th November, 2016 and the
averments made by the petitioner in the petition, the Learned Trial Court
proceeded to dispose of the Misc. Case and vide Order No.5 was pleased
to allow the prayer on contest and Sessions Case No. 49 of 2015 pending
in the Fast Track of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Chandannagore was withdrawn and transferred to the 1st Court of the
Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hooghly at Chinsurah for trial.
10. That pursuant to the Order No. 5 dated 30th January, 2017 passed by
the Court of the Learned Sessions Judge, Hooghly at Chinsurah, the case
records pertaining to Sessions Case No. 49 of 2015 have already been
transferred from the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Fast Track, Chandannagore, District - Hooghly to the Court of the
Learned Additional Sessions Judge,1st Court, Hooghly at Chinsurah
where it has been renumbered as Special Case No. 9 of 2017 and date
has been fixed for framing of Charge.
11. Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das, learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the Learned Trial Court while passing the impugned order
erred both in law and in facts and failed to appreciate that it is admitted
state of affairs that the opposite party no. 2 is a resident of
Chandannagore and the place of occurrence of the alleged incident and
the Prosecution Witnesses also reside in Chandannagore and hence
transfer of the said Criminal Proceeding from Chandannagore to
Chinsurah would cause great hardships to the said witnesses for which
there is every likelihood that the truth will not be unearthed which would
subject the petitioner to suffer irreparable loss and injury and serious
prejudice.
12. It is further submitted that the Learned Trial Court while passing the
impugned order erred both in law and in facts and thereby failed to
appreciate that 30th January, 2017 was the date fixed for further hearing
of the said case and on that day none of the parties took any steps as will
be revealed from the order impugned and hence it was highly improper
on the part of the Learned Court to proceed to dispose of the said case on
the basis of the hearing held on 10th November, 2016 which was by itself
illegal and arbitrary and violative of the principles of Natural Justice &
Fair Play in consideration of the fact that the petitioner is an accused
person in connection with the said Criminal Proceeding.
13. That the Learned Trial Court while passing the order impugned did not
provide adequate opportunity to the petitioner to rebut the contentions
raised by the opposite party no. 2 in his petition being Criminal Misc.
Case No. 2451 of 2016 under Section 408 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973.
14. The Learned Trial Court while passing the impugned Order erred both in
law and in facts being oblivious of the fact that the petitioner is a
lady who would face difficulties for travelling to Chinsurah from
either Chandannagore being her matrimonial home or Kalyani being
her paternal home on the dates fixed.
15. That the impugned order passed by the Learned Trial Court is otherwise
bad both in law and in facts and the same is liable to be set aside in the
interest of justice.
16. Mr. Arijit Ganguly, learned counsel for the State submits that the
state/prosecution is not aggrieved by the order under revision.
17. Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, learned counsel for the opposite party no.
2/de facto complainant has submitted that the order under revision
was passed on 30.01.2017. Since then 32 dates have fixed by the
Sessions Court.
18. Vide Order dated 19.07.2022, the prayer for discharge by the petitioner
was rejected.
19. From the materials on record including the revisional application it
appears that the petitioner is a resident of Kalyani, District - Nadia.
20. The present Trial Court at Chinsurah, on transfer is closer to the
petitioner's place of residence than that at Chandannagore.
21. The contention of the petitioner that no opportunity of hearing was given,
while hearing the petition for transfer is unfounded as it is clear from
the order under revision that the petitioner's lawyer before the
Sessions Court was heard.
22. Section 408 empowers the Sessions Judge/Court to transfer a case from
one Criminal Court to another Criminal Court, if deemed fit in the
interest of justice in its Sessions Division.
Sessions Judge may act:-
1. On its own.
2. On a lower court report.
3. On the application of a party.
23. In the present case, it is seen that the Learned Sessions Judge has
passed a well reasoned order taking all relevant facts and
circumstances into consideration, expedient for the ends of justice
and no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner nor has there
been any abuse of process of law.
24. The order under revision thus being in accordance with law needs no
interference.
25. CRR 1131 of 2020 is dismissed.
26. The Trial Court shall make all endeavour to dispose of the case
expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments.
27. All connected applications, if any, stands disposed of.
28. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
29. Copy of this judgment be sent to the learned Trial Court for necessary
compliance.
30. Urgent certified website copy of this judgment, if applied for, be supplied
expeditiously after complying with all, necessary legal formalities.
(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)
