AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Joymalya Bagchi, J.—Mr. Debasish Roy, learned advocate appears in support of the revisional application and submits that the petitioner is the defacto complainant in the instant case and is the head of the school wherein the alleged act of dacoity took place.
The factual matrix giving rise to this case is to the effect that on March 14, 2015 between 2-00 a.m. to 5-00 a.m. the miscreants had broken into the establishment of Jesus and Mary Convent School, entered into the room of one of the nuns, tied her up and committed dacoity from the said Convent by taking away five lakhs of rupees and other valuable articles. It is further alleged that one of the sisters of the Order was also violated.
Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the opposite parties no. 1 to 5 for commissioning of the alleged offences. Subsequently, on further investigation a supplementary charge sheet was filed against the opposite parties no. 3, 4 and 6. Thereafter the case was committed to the court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge at Ranaghat, Nadia and the charges were framed against the opposite parties herein. The case is presently pending at the stage of recording prosecution evidence.
The petitioner has come before this court praying for transfer of the case to a court of competent jurisdiction in sessions revision of Kolkata or South 24-Paraganas.
The grounds for transfer canvassed in the revision petition is to the effect that the petitioner and the other sisters, who are the victims of the crime, are presently stationed outside the State and it will be convenient from them to come to Kolkata and depose in the case. It is further pleaded that in view of the traumatic experience suffered by them at Ranaghat, it would be a matter of extreme mental trauma to them to return to the said place of occurrence for deposing in trial.
The learned Public Prosecutor supports the prayer of the petitioner and submits that it will be convenient to conduct the trial if the case is transferred to Kolkata.
On the other hand, Mr. Sujon Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the accused/opposite parties, opposes the prayer for transfer. It is submitted that the opposite parties are in jail and have been provided legal assistance by the concerned District Legal Aid Services Authority. It is also submitted that mere trauma of a victim is no ground to transfer the proceeding, particularly, when most of the witnesses are residing in and around Ranaghat.
By order dated February 26, 2016, I had appointed Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, learned advocate, to appear and assist this court as amicus curiae on behalf of the accused persons.
Mr. Ganguly appears and submits that the petitioner is not the only victim in the instant case and that the other victims have not approached this court.
I have considered the respective submissions made on behalf of the parties in the light of the materials on record. I find that the petitioner and other members of the Missionary Order are the victims and the most vital witnesses of the alleged incident. One of the most important facet of fair trial is to ensure the victim is given the best opportunity to participate in the trial without any intimidation or trauma. No victim of crime or any witness has come before the court to oppose the prayer for transfer.
Keeping in mind the objections raised against the prayer for transfer made on behalf of the petitioner and other victims of the crime, I find that the opposite parties are in custody and they have been provided with legal assistance by the District Legal Aid Services Authority. I am of the opinion that legal aid which may be provided to the opposite parties at Kolkata would be of much higher standard than that what is provided in the Sessions division of Nadia. Accordingly, I am of the view that transfer of the proceeding to Kolkata, in fact, will also enure to the benefit of the accused persons.
In the aforesaid circumstances and bearing in mind the necessity of preserving the right of access to justice of the victims on one hand and the accused persons'' right to quality legal representation on the other hand, I direct transfer of the case from the court of the learned Sessions Judge at Ranaghat, Nadia, to the court of the learned City Sessions Judge at Kolkata, who shall conduct the case herself or transfer the same to any Additional Sessions Judge in the said Sessions division. The trial shall be conducted following the procedure laid down under Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the same is to be concluded within sixty days from the date of transfer.
It is observed that upon transfer of the case and production of the accused persons, the presiding officer shall make necessary queries to the accused persons and ensure that adequate legal assistance is provided to them in accordance with law.
I record my appreciation of Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, learned advocate, in rendering his assistance in disposing of the matter.
The application for transfer is accordingly allowed.