Back
High Court Of Calcutta
Asish Baran Mukherjee
STATE - Appellant
Versus
KLICHINE ALEKSANDRE - Respondent
CRI. R. 8 Of 1996
Decided On : 03/15/1996
TRANSFER OF CASE - SECTION 407(1)(C) CR.P.C. - TRANSFER OF CASE FROM PURULIA TO CALCUTTA - NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE - SECURITY CONCERNS - CONVENIENCE OF ACCUSED AND WITNESSES - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 407(1)(C) CR.P.C. - MEANING OF "CASE" - PRINCIPLES OF TRANSFER - INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
Fact of the Case:
A case involving the dropping of sophisticated arms and ammunition from an aircraft in Purulia, India, leading to the arrest of six foreign nationals and two Indian nationals. The C.B.I. took over the investigation and sought to transfer the case from Purulia to Calcutta due to the national and international significance of the case, security concerns, and the convenience of the accused and witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that there was no legal bar to transferring the case from Purulia to Calcutta under Section 407(1)(c) Cr.P.C. The court interpreted "case" to mean a proceeding for the prosecution of a person alleged to have committed an offense, and found that the present proceeding fell within this definition. The court also found that the transfer was expedient in the interest of justice, considering the security concerns, the distance between Purulia and Calcutta, and the convenience of the accused and witnesses.
Issues: 1. Whether there is a legal bar to transferring the case from Purulia to Calcutta under Section 407(1)(c) Cr.P.C. 2. Whether the transfer is expedient in the interest of justice.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that Section 407(1)(c) Cr.P.C. allows for the transfer of a case from one court to another when required by any provision of the Code or when it will tend to the general convenience of the parties, witnesses, or is expedient for the ends of justice. The court found that there was no legal bar to transferring the case in this instance. 2. The court found that the transfer was expedient in the interest of justice, considering the security concerns, the distance between Purulia and Calcutta, and the convenience of the accused and witnesses. The court noted that the six foreign nationals were unrepresented and needed an interpreter to communicate with the court, and that the distance between Purulia and Calcutta made it difficult for the accused and witnesses to attend court proceedings.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revisional application and transferred the case from Purulia to Calcutta. The court also directed that the accused persons on bail would not be required to attend court on the dates fixed for the report of the Investigating Officer during the investigation stage unless specifically directed by the court, and that the C.B.I. authorities could only interrogate the accused persons on bail after furnishing their names to the court and obtaining a specific order from the court.
( 1 ) THE revisional application arises out of an application under section 407 (1) (c) Cr. P. C. for transferring Case No. G. R 1542 of 1995 from the Court of learned S. D. J. M. , Purulia to the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta. The petitioner is the C. B. I. Their case in short is that Jhalda P. S. Case No. 152 of 1995 under section 121/121a/122/123 I. P. C. and under section 25/27 Arms Act was started on 18. 12. 95 on the basis of a sun moto F. I. R. by O. C. of Jhalda Police Station in connection with dropping of huge quantity of sophisticated arms and ammunitions from the aircraft in the night of 17/18. 12. 95. In consequent of Notification dated 27. 12. 95 of the Slate of West Bengal and Notification of Central Government dated 28. 12. 95, the C. B. I. took over the invention of the said P. S. Case and a Criminal case was registered in the office of the C. B. I. in Calcutta accordingly.
( 2 ) THE said aircraft dropping the arms was made to land at Sahara Airport at Bombay and six foreign nationals who were the Crew members and were found in the aircraft were arrested on 23. 12. 95. They were produced before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate at Bandra. Bombay on 24. 12. 95 and was remanded to police custody till 1. 1. 96 with direction to produce them before the S. D. J. M. at Purulia. During investigation two other accused were arrested at New Delhi and produced before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House at New Delhi. They were remanded to police custody till 30. 12. 95 with the direction to produced them before S. D. J. M. , Purulia. The accused persons were accordingly produced before S. D. J. M. , Purulia on the relevant dates when they were given to further police remand for periods up to 6. 1. 96 for some of the accused and up to 8. 1. 96 for the rest. the aircraft has also been seized and kept at Sahara International Airport at Bombay.
( 3 ) DUE to serious nature of the case high security arrangements are to be taken at the production of the accused persons to be taken to Purulia from Calcutta. Movement of the accused persons from Calcutta to Purulia is risky in the interest of the foreign nationals also the case is of serious nature having national and international certifications and investigations is not only confined to Purulia but different parts of the country namely Varanasi, Calcutta, Madras, Delhi, Bombay etc. and also outside country like Bulgaria, Pakistan, Thailand, Britain, Singapore, Latvia and other places. Purulia is far off from Calcutta and it takes a lot of time to cover the distance. There is no airport near Purulia but the nearest one is situated in Calcutta. Of the eight (8) accused persons arrested so far, six (6) are foreign nationals and two (2) are residents of Delhi and as such their interest will not be hampered if the case is transferred to Calcutta. Involvement of national and international organisations cannot be ruled out for which top security arrangements are required to be made for keeping the accused persons in judicial custody which could be provided in Calcutta. Accordingly, the present application was made on 5. 1. 96. The application was moved before the Hon'ble Chief Justice on 5. 1. 96 when it was assigned to the Division Bench presided over by the Hon'ble Chief Justice and Shri Mukul Gopal Mukherjee, J. After giving initial directions for remand of the accused on a specified dates the matter was directed to be replaced before the regular Bench on 17. 1. 96. On 17. 1. 96 the matter was placed before the Division Bench presided over by Shri S. K. Mukherjee, J. and Shri Rabin Bhattacharyya, J. Direction was given to place the matter before the Bench to be presided over by a single Judge taking up revisional applications. Accordingly, the matter was placed before this Bench on 22. 1. 96. At a subsequent stage an application was filed by the C. B. I. for addition of parties as it was found during hearing on 22. 1. 96 tha
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
