Tarapada Maity @ Suraj v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

27-09-2024 (ct. no.28) S. De (Rejected) CRA (DB) 247 of 2024 In re: An application for admission of appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

- A n d - In the matter of : Tarapada Maity @ Suraj.

.... Appellant.

Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay, Ms. Trisha Rakshit, Ms. Aishwarya Datta, Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty, ... For the appellant. Mr. Sudip Kumar, Mr. Kaushik Biswas, ... For the State. Order dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J.

1. The appellant says that he is in custody for 2 years. The victim lady has already been examined. There are inconsistencies between the depositions of the victim and her father. Only 5 out of 24 charge-sheet named witnesses have been examined. He prays for bail on the ground of delay in progress of trial as also on merits.

2. Opposing the prayer, learned State counsel says that there is clear and direct incriminating evidence against the appellant. 7 witnesses have already been examined. All efforts will be made to bring the trial to an early conclusion.

3. We have seen the deposition of the victim lady. Very clearly and in unequivocal words, she describes how she was called to the place of occurrence by the appellant and was ravished. The deposition is in consonance with the statement she had Signed By :

SANDIP DE High Court of Calcutta 27 th of September 2024 05:46:42 PM

recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In view of the nature and gravity of the offence and the available evidence against the appellant, we are not inclined to entertain his prayer for bail.

4. CRA (DB) 247 of 2024 is dismissed.

5. However, keeping in mind the importance of a citizen's fundamental right to personal liberty and speedy trial, we direct the learned Trial Court to expedite the trial to the fullest extent possible and conclude the same on an early date and definitely within one year from the next date fixed for recording evidence, without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties and, if necessary, by fixing frequent schedules for examination of witnesses.

6. Needless to say, all observations made in this order are only for the purpose of disposing of the bail application and shall have no effect on the trial.

7. Let this order be communicated by the parties to the learned Trial Court.

( Apurba Sinha Ray, J. ) ( Arijit Banerjee, J. ) Signed By :

SANDIP DE High Court of Calcutta 27 th of September 2024 05:46:42 PM