WPA/11660/2020 of AFTAB ANSARI Vs State of West Bengal AND ORS on 31 December 2020

Ct. 06 Item Nos.0431.12.2020 (suvendu)

Vacation Bench

WPA 11660 OF 2020

Aftab Ansari

Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

(Via Video Conference)

Mr. Bhaskar Prosad BanerjeeMr. Parashar Baidya Ms. Shalini Ghosh ………for the petitioner Mr. Pantu Deb Roy Mr. Anand Farmania ……….for the State This is an application, inter alia, praying thatthe investigation of the case be done through videoconference so far as the examination of the defactocomplainant and his father/victim are concerned.

Report filed on behalf of the State and theaffidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner aretaken on record.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of thepetitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is thedefacto complainant of the case and the son of thevictim who had been abducted by some unknownaccused. After the incident happened on 17[th]February, 2020, the petitioner lodged an FIR on 18[th]

February, 2020. On 19[th] February, 2020 therelatives of the victim paid a part of the ransomdemanded by the accused and had the victimreleased. Subsequently, the defacto complainantand the other witnesses received several threat callsfrom the accused. In fear, they left for their nativeplace in Bihar. In the meantime, the InvestigatingOfficer of the case has been calling up the defactocomplainant and his father/victim and asking themto join the investigation, failing which they shall haveto face serious consequences. In the interest ofjustice, the interrogation of the defacto complainantand the victim may be done through videoconference, as far as possible. However, in case thevictim and the defacto complainant are required toattend a test identification parade or the like, theyshall make themselves available upon due notice andprovided adequate protection is given to them.

Leaned counsel appearing on behalf of the Staterelies on the report filed by the Investigating Officerand submits as follows. During investigation, theInvestigating Officer collected evidence, arrested twopersons, made seizure under Section 27 of theEvidence Act. However, when the InvestigatingOfficer tried to contact with the defacto complainantand the victim for their further assistance, the same was denied. At this stage, it is submitted thatfurther recording of the statements of the defactocomplainant and the victim may be done throughvideo conference. If victim is required to attend TIparade, the Investigating Officer shall make adequatearrangements taking into consideration the safetyand security of the victim and the defactocomplainant so that such exercise can be properlyconcluded.

I have heard the submissions of the learnedcounsels appearing for the parties and have perusedthe writ application.

It appears that some evidence have beencollected during investigation and it would befair on the part of the Investigating Officer to requirefurther assistance of the victim and the defactocomplainant.

However, considering the facts of the presentcase and the threat calls given to the victim, it will befit and proper to undertake such exercise by videoconferencing and/or exchange of e-mails, so far aspracticable.

In the event the victim is required to attend a TIparade or the like, the Investigating Officer shallmake necessary arrangements for the same by takingdue care about the safety and security of the victim and the petitioner and upon due notice to them andthe victim and the defacto complainant/petitionershall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in thisregard.

With these observations, the writ application isdisposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for,be given to the parties on usual undertaking.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)