ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-B

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).15858/2023 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-03-2023 in CRM(DB) No.649/2023 passed by the High Court At Calcutta)

ABANI BHUSAN SINGHA @ ABANI SINGHA Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Respondent(s)

Date : 02-02-2024 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. VISWANATHAN
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amarjit Singh Bedi, AOR
Mr. Varun Chandiok, Adv.
Ms. Riya Seth, Adv.
Ms. Anubhi Goyal, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv.
Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.
Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv.
Mr. Navanjay Mahapatra, Adv.
Mr. Karunakar Mahalik, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

1.The petitioner seeks enlargement on regular bail in FIR No.04/2011 dated 07.01.2011 registered at Police Station Lalgarh, District Paschim Medinipur (West Bengal) under Sections 302, 307, 326, 148, 149 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.

2.The prosecution case is that the petitioner along with his co- accused/associates, who are members of a banned outfit, indulged in indiscriminate firing on the villagers, where the petitioner and his co-accused had set up their camp. Nine persons were killed, whereas 29 suffered multiple injuries. The petitioner was arrested on 14.01.2011 and is, thus, in custody for last more than 13 years. It appears from the contents of the FIR that the petitioner was not attributed any specific act of firing. However, during the course of evidence led by the prosecution, it has emerged that the petitioner was among those who fired on the victims.

3.Be that as it may, the question whether the petitioner was at the forefront and fired shots on the victims, is a subject-matter of trial. It is neither expedient nor prudent to give any opinion in this regard at this stage. There is no denial to the fact that some of the co-accused, whom firing has been attributed, namely, Pullara Mondal, Pintu Roy, Lob Dull etc., have already been released on bail. The counter affidavit filed by CBI reveals that out of 115 witnesses cited in the chargesheet, 77 have been examined so far. The conclusion of trial will still take some time.

4.Taking into consideration the period for which the petitioner has remained incarcerated and the fact that similarly placed co- accused have already been enlarged on bail and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

5.It is directed that the petitioner as well as his co-accused, who are on bail, shall remain present before the Trial Court on each and every date of hearing, save and except when they are granted exemption from appearance by the Trial Court. If any of the accused fail to attend the trial proceedings, it shall be taken as a misuse of the concession of bail and the prosecution shall be entitled to seek cancellation of bail of such an accused.

6.Similarly, the prosecution shall be at liberty to approach this Court for withdrawal of concession of bail if it is found that the petitioner is attempting to influence and/or extend threats to the witnesses, who are yet to be examined. Any such incident will be viewed seriously.

7.The petitioner, his co-accused as well as the prosecution will extend full cooperation to the Trial Court to conclude the pending proceedings. Trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude the trial within eight months.

8.The special leave petition is disposed of in the above terms.

9.All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

(ARJUN BISHT) (PREETHI T.C.)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)