SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nilanjana Ghosal vs State Of West Bengal And Ors on 30 June, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

OD-2
ORDER SHEET
WPO 225 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CO0NSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE

NILANJANA GHOSAL
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

BEFORE:
The Hon’ble JUSTICE SHIVAKANT PRASAD
Date : 30TH June, 2021.

APPEARANCE:
Saurabh Guhathakurata, Adv.
Ms. Rituparna Ghosh, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Sardar, Adv.
…for the petitioner

Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Adv.
Mr. Suman Sankar Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Pronoy Basak, Adv.
…for the adding party(father of the child/wife of the petitioner)

Mr. Arindam Sen, Adv.
…for the State Legal Aid Service Authority.

Mr. Amitesh Banerjee, Adv.
Ms. Ipsita Banerjee, Adv.
…for the State of West Bengal.

The Court : In compliance of this Court’s order dated 22nd June,

2021 the State Legal Services Authority has submitted report.

The report reflects that by following the principles laid down in Clause 9

of NALSA (Child Friendly Legal Services to Children and Their Protection)

Scheme, 2015. The authority had taken necessary action in the interest and

welfare of the son of the writ petitioner.
2

On 14.5.2021 the State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal received

an e-mail from Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee attaching a hand written letter from

Sri Sagnic Bhattacharjee himself wherein the child had made several serious

allegations against his mother and her friend Vivek Gupta.

On 17.5.2021 the said authority received an e-mail from CWC, Kolkata

wherein it was stated that based on the appeal of Sri Sagnic Bhattacharjee,

CWC, Kolkata has initiated the process and will do the needful.

On 4.6.2021 the State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal an e-mail

from Sri Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee was received stating that the CWC Official

had went to his ex-wife’s house to collect the information for making a report

but could not enquire into the matter properly owing to the non-co-operation

of his ex-wife and being worried about the safety and security about his son

Sagnic, he requested the State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal to look

into the matter. On receipt of this e-mail the Registrar cum Deputy Secretary,

State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal forwarded the mail to CWC,

Kolkata for taking appropriate steps in accordance with law and a report was

called for from CWC, Kolkata on or before 07.06.2021. But no report was

received from CWC, Kolkata till date.

However, the State Legal Services Authority, West Bengal has received

certain e-mails from Sri Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee enclosing copy of divorce

decree and other documents and appealed for school admission of his son

Sagnic Bhattacharjee on the ground that while he was in the custody of his

mother, his education was discontinued after completing 5th standard in the

year 2018 and presently Sagnic Bhattacharjee is school dropout. So, the State
3

Legal Services Authority, West Bengal in the obligation to follow the principles

laid down in Clause 9 of NALSA (Child Friendly Legal Services to Children and

their Protection) Scheme, 2015 took steps for his safe home. Report be kept on

record.

It would appear that adhering to the guidelines under the Clause 9 of

the Scheme 2015 and for the best interest and welfare of the child, to ensure

the dignity of the child and for the safety of the child, the Authority has

suitably taken steps to keep Sagnic Bhattacharjee in a safe home so that he is

not subjected to any home abuse and neglect.

A photo copy of the hand written complaint of Sagnic Bhattacharjee has

been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner and shown to the writ

petitioner being the mother of the said Sagnic Bhattacharjee present in Court

to verify whether the writing appearing in the complaint is that of her son. The

petitioner has raised a doubt in respect of hand written complaint with

contention that it is all done at the instance of her ex-husband to get the

custody of the child. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

custody of the child in shelter home and action taken by the Authority

concerned is not in accordance with the provision of Section 39 of Guardians

and Wards Act, 1890 which provides for removal of guardian. The petitioner

has disputed allegation of harassment to her son as leveled against her. The

Court which can deal with removal of a guardian declared by the Court

appointed in terms of the order of mutual divorce. It is submitted that the

petitioner was given the custody of the child in terms of the mutual decree of

divorce and for the reason of ill-treatment or neglect to take proper care of the
4

child, if allegation so made, the ex-husband of the petitioner could apply

before the District Court for custody of the her son because the father of the

son ought to have made an application for such removal of the guardian

mother under Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 as the father

and mother both being natural guardians are alive ergo, there is no

justification for keeping the child in a safe home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a unreported decision in

Dr. Sharmistha Kar Purokayastha Vs. State of West Bengal Ors. dated

02.11.2010 based in WP No. 21904(W) of 2020 which was also a case

pertaining the substantial allegation that petitioner mother of the child was ill-

treating the child and as a result the child was severely shocked and pained.

It would appear that the allegation of torture meted out to the child is

required to be ascertained as the petitioner has denied the written complaint

having been written in the hand writing and signature of her son.

Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay learned Advocate for the ex-husband

of the petitioner submits to implead the father of the child as respondent in

the writ application such prayer is allowed for just and fair decision since, the

welfare of the child is paramount consideration for the custody of the child.

Mr. Banerjee, Senior learned counsel for the State respondent is

requested to do the needful in the matter of safe production of the son of the

petitioner before this Court to ascertain the real allegation.
5

Let the matter appearing on 2nd July, 2021.

(SHIVKANT PRASAD, J.)

Sbghosh

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation