YASMIN PARVIN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 407 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1073 (in short Cr.P.C.) has been filed by petitioner Yasmin Parvin, daughter of Nasim Ansary of village ­ Bagadabra, Police Station Saltora, District Bankura against the opposite party no. 1 The State of West Bengal and seven other opposite parties as opposite party nos. 2 to 8 who are residents of Sanspur under Police Station Santuri, District Purulia for withdrawal and transfer of G.R. Case No. 187 of 2011 from the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur, District Purulia to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bankura.

(2.) Petitioner's case is that her marriage was performed on 26.11.2011 with opposite party no. 2. She was subjected to physical and mental torture by opposite party nos. 2 to 8. She lodged complaint against them at Santuri Police Station and a case under Section 498 A/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code was started against them. Said case was registered as G.R. Case No. 187 of 2011 in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur. Charge -sheet was submitted against the accused persons (opposite party nos. 2 to 8 herein). Being driven out from her matrimonial home by opposite party nos. 2 to 8 the petitioner has been living in her paternal house at Bagadabra in the district of Bankura. Since after petitioner's lodging the aforesaid complaint at Santuri Police Station opposite party nos. 2 to 8 threatened her asking to withdraw the complaint. On 20.06.2012 she went to Raghunathpur Court for query about the case and on that occasion said opposite parties threatened her so that she would not appear in Court. She informed that fact at Santuri police station, Purulia and also at Saltora police station, Bankura. Again on 20.06.2013 the petitioner was going to attend the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur in response to a summons. In the bus stoppage the opposite party nos. 2 to 8 abused her in filthy language and assaulted her dragging therefrom. They forcibly compelled her return from bus stand by return bus and she could not attend Court for giving evidence on that date. She has annexed copy of the summons and of her bus tickets dated 10.06.2013 to substantiate her plea. Said incident was reported to learned APP Raghunathpur Court, Superintendent of Police, Purulia and also Saltora Police Station apprehending danger to her life. She apprehends that fair trial of the case in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur, Purulia is not possible. She prays that in order to prevent abuse of process of Court the G.R. Case No. 187 of 2011 be transferred from the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bankura.

(3.) Despite service of notice of this case the opposite party nos. 2 to 8 did not turn up to contest this case. At the time fo hearing this case learned advocate for the petitioners referred to a decision of this High Court in the case of Yasmin Khatoon Vs. State of West Bengal and Others reported in 2006 (1) CLJ (Cal) 393. Having gone through that decision I find similarity with this case. Petitioner has filed certified copy of charge -sheet submitted in G.R. Case No. 187 of 2011. It appears that out of five private witnesses including the petitioner four witnesses are residing under police station Saltora, Bankura. By the copies of summons and bus tickets dated 10.06.2013 it is established that despite petitioner's sincere attempt to attend court for giving evidence in response to summons to witness she failed to attend Court on 10.06.2013. Such circumstance stands in the way of fair trial of the G.R. Case No. 187 of 2011 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raghunathpur. In my opinion, the petitioner may not have confidence in the administration of justice in case of continuance of the proceeding in Raghunathpur Court. Attending circumstances speak much to make the petitioner's apprehension of danger to her life reasonable. It will not be out of place to mention that it will be convenient for the four out of five private witnesses listed in the charge -sheet will be in more convenience in giving their evidence in Bankura Court than in Raghunathpur Court. Learned Advocate fot the state submitted at the time of hearing that the matter of security of the witnesses in connection with trial of a criminal case is an important factor and in this case apprehension of danger to her life in case of her attending in Raghunathpur Court is reasonable. He submitted that necessary order may be passed so that the witnesses can depose in Court without fear.