Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 339 (CAL)

Krishna Basu v. State Of West Bengal

2020-03-03

JAY SENGUPTA

body2020
JUDGMENT Jay Sengupta, J. - This is an application praying for transfer of a trial from the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas to any other Court. 2. Let a copy of this application be served upon Mr. Swapan Banerjee and Mr. Suman De, learned Advocates who are present in Court today and who ordinarily appear on behalf of the State. Their engagement may be regularised by the competent authority of the State in due course. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The learned Trial court is overburdened with work as he has been given the additional charge of Special Court, NDPS Act. That is why the trial could not proceed much. On several dates although the witnesses are present, they could not be examined. In the interest of justice, the trial should be transferred to any other competent Court with lesser burden of work. 4. I have heard the submissions of the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the State and have perused the revision petition. 5. From a perusal of the order sheet of the learned Trial Court, it appears that the learned Trial Court had been fixing dates for hearing on regular and reasonable intervals. It is true that on some occasions, evidence could not be taken. But, on a most of the other occasions the matter got adjournment for some other reasons. On a few dates there was a resolution of the local Bar and on some others the witnesses did not turn up. However, I do not find any particular laxity on the part of the learned Court in dealing with the matter. 6. Learned Trial Courts are burdened with huge number of cases. This is not a ground to transfer a case from one Court to another. 7. Accordingly, I am not inclined to transfer the trial to any other Court. 8. In the interest of justice, the learned Trial Court is requested to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible without granting any unnecessary adjournment to any of the parties, preferably within a period of one year from the next date of hearing. 9. With these observations, the revisional application is disposed of. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.