The Division Bench of Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Anubrata Mondal @ Kesto Vs The Central Bureau of Investigation held that the paramount influence of the Petitioner as a political heavyweight and materials collected showing misuse of such power to influence witnesses and derail the investigation places him in a unique position in comparison to others who are on bail. Enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would have an ominous impact not only on the witnesses but on the smooth administration of criminal justice in the case.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as “CBI”) registered the case against Md. Enamul Haque and his associates alleging that they entered into a conspiracy with BSF and customs officials to illegally smuggle cattle to Bangladesh. Moreover, the Petitioner used his influence to facilitate the crime and got wrongful gains for his patronage.
During the investigation, CBI summoned the Petitioner for interrogation however, he evaded the process. The Special Court turned down the Petitioner’s bail application, resulting in the present Bail Application before this Court.
Contentions of the Appellant:
It was contended that CBI had not arrested other Co-Accused while the Petitioner was arrested because of his political affiliations. It was also contended that there is no legally admissible evidence that the Petitioner was a conspirator in the crime. It was further submitted that the investigation is perfunctory, and the CBI has not recorded the statements of the majority of the charged witnesses. Allegations of frightening witnesses and/or undermining the legal process are figments of the imagination created to resist the bail request.
Contentions of the CBI:
It was contended that the Petitioner is one of the prime conspirators in the organized crime racket and unlike other Co-Accused who cooperated with the investigation, the Petitioner not only fled the investigation but also used numerous deceptions to undermine it. As a result, he was arrested. Even after his detention, his power remains undiminished, and he continues to threaten witnesses through his soldiers and agents. It was submitted that a crucial witness is untraceable.
Observations of the Court:
It was observed that the grant of bail to an undertrial requires a fine balance between the right to liberty and presumption of innocence of an Accused on one hand and public interest in the discharge of the sovereign duty of the State to investigate, prosecute and punish an offender on the other hand. Detention of an undertrial is not to punish him even before he is pronounced guilty. The purpose of detention pending trial is to ensure the smooth and proper administration of criminal justice.
It was noted that the paramount influence of the Petitioner as a political heavyweight and materials collected showing misuse of such power to influence witnesses and derail the investigation places him in a unique position in comparison to others who are on bail. Enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would have an ominous impact not only on the witnesses but on the smooth administration of criminal justice in the case.
The decision of the Court:
The Hon’ble Court refused to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Case Title: Anubrata Mondal @ Kesto Vs The Central Bureau of Investigation
Case No: C.R.M. (DB) 4229 of 2022
Coram: Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta
Advocate for the petitioner: Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ankur Chawla, Adv. Mr. Somopriyo Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Karan Dudhwewala, Adv. Mr. Avik Ghatak, Adv. Mr. Dipayan Dan, Adv.
Advocate for the CBI: Mr. D.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arun Kumar Maiti, Adv. Mr. Anirban Mitra, Adv. Mr. Amajit De, Adv. Mr. Somnath Adhikary, Adv.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
