The Supreme Court criticized the West Bengal government for challenging the bail of an undertrial after it was granted, despite the High Court rejecting the bail four times earlier. The apex court expressed surprise, stating, “We are extremely surprised to see that High Court rejected bail 4 times and when it is granted now, the State has challenged it.” The court warned the state not to provoke further comments against the government.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court sharply criticized the West Bengal government for challenging the bail granted to an undertrial who had spent over three years in jail in a case involving the misappropriation of rice worth Rs. 3 crore.
As the state’s appeal brought before the court, a bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra expressed their surprise, noting that the bail had already been denied four times by lower courts.
Read Also: Calcutta High Court: Undertrials’ Interim Bail Rights Aligned with Convicts’ Parole
Justice Datta remarked,
“This is a Magistrate triable case? An accused has been in jail for over 3 years now. How can this be possible? We are extremely surprised to see that the High Court rejected bail four times, and now that it’s granted, the State has challenged it. Don’t push us to make comments on the State government. He has already undergone the maximum sentence that could have been imposed as per Section 29(2) CrPC, and now the State again wants him back in jail,”
When the government counsel requested a passover to review the Court’s concerns, Justice Datta issued a warning, stating that the Bench would impose costs on the State for filing such an appeal, and these costs would be borne by the officer who authorized the filing of the Special Leave Petition (SLP).
Justice Datta asserted,
“We will impose costs, which will be paid by the officer who authorized the filing of this SLP,”
Justice Mishra further remarked,
“You are aware that we have issued many orders on how matters of liberty should be dealt with, and yet this appeal is filed. You are an experienced lawyer.”
Ultimately, the Court dismissed the State’s appeal.
In this case, the accused, Rajdeep Roy, served as the director of Laxmi Vinayak Rice Mill Private Limited.
According to records from the Calcutta High Court, Roy had been entrusted with paddy to be processed into rice. It was alleged that the value of the unaccounted rice exceeded Rs. 3 crores.
During the High Court proceedings, it was noted that Roy had been in custody for over three years with little progress in the trial. Given that 24 additional witnesses still needed to be examined and that even if convicted, the offences would not warrant a mandatory life sentence, the High Court granted him bail in April of this year.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the state’s appeal, allowing the bail granted to Roy by the High Court to stand. The Court’s strong response reflected its concern over the prolonged detention of undertrials and the need for judicial processes to be conducted in a manner that respects personal liberty.