Jitendra Narain v. The State (The Union Territory Of Andaman And Nicobar Islands)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ...

CRM(DB)/10/2022 Jitendra Narain vs.

The State (The Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands) Mr. Deep Chaim Kabir Mr. S.Ajith Prasad ... for the petitioner Ms. A.S.Zinu ... for the State Mr. P.C.Das (through virtual mode) Mr. Arul Prasanth ... for the private respondent December 13, 2022 [SR] Item No.1 The application for bail is filed inter alia on the ground that the petitioner is in a precarious medical condition. He is suffering from ailments relating to the lower intestine and rectum. The matter, prior to his detention has travelled from the High Court to the Supreme Court and back and also to the Sessions Court. In SLP No.34487 of 2022, the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed an order dated 21st October, 2022. The SLP arose out of an interim protection in anticipatory bail application granted by a Coordinate Bench in CRM(A)/5/2022.

Earlier the Delhi High Court also entertained the application for transit anticipatory bail being application No.3169 of 2022 and allowed partial relief to the petitioner by order dated 20th October, 2022.

A prayer for formal anticipatory bail thereafter came to be considered by a Bench sitting in vacation at the Calcutta High Court, under its jurisdiction over this Circuit Bench in CRM (A)/5/2022 on 21st October, 2022. Further interim protection was granted on condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation. The order was carried to the Hon'ble Supreme Court at the instance of the victim in SLP referred to hereinabove.

The Andaman and Nicobar Administration had also filed a separate SLP against the order of the High Court dated 21st October, 2022. The petitioner had also filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The Administration withdrew its SLP. The petitioner also withdrew its writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in view of the aforesaid order dated 21st October, 2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The prayer for anticipatory bail was not entertained.

The petitioner was taken into custody after his application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Sessions Court at Port Blair in Misc.Case No.87 of 2022 on 10th November, 2022. Hence, this instant application for bail. The brief facts relevant for a bail application are that the petitioner was accused of offences under section 376(D) along with two other persons Rinku and Rishi. Rinku is a known local pimp. Rishi is the Labour Commissioner. Initially both Rinku and Rishi were absconding. They were subsequently arrested. The petitioner, in custody, was

continuously interrogated. It is submitted that he is cooperating. The police have sought fresh P.C after the arrest of the co-accused.

Counsel for the State, however, vehemently denies such submissions and says that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation.

On the merits of the charges, it is argued by Mr. Kabir that the applicant could not have been present in Port Blair since he was on official work at New Delhi between the 11-18 October, 2022. On the day when the second incident is stated to have taken place, the petitioner was admittedly at Port Blair. He submits that he was under 'Z' category security along with family members and was also interacting on legal matters with government officials from New Delhi. He therefore could not have access to the victim girl in his Bungalow.

Mr. P.C.Das and Mr. Arul Prasanth, learned counsel have made a detailed submissions on behalf of the victim. There is some doubt in the mind of this Court as regards locus of the victim in the present application. However, the victim has been heard.

This Court has considered some statements of witnesses under sections 161 and 164 of the Cr.P.C and the case diary in some detail. Counsel for the Sate/IO submits that there are many more victim girls.

The submissions of the State, that the petitioner having held the position of the Chief Secretary of the Islands

(one of the highest executive positions in the UT) could tamper with the evidence, cannot be lightly brushed aside. There is an allegation that the petitioner has tried to delete the footage of the CCTV camera in his house.

This court however does not wish to elaborate thereupon as it may prejudice the investigation.

The chances of the petitioner influencing the other witnesses also cannot be ruled out in the aforesaid facts, considering the submission of the Investigating Officer that there have been other victim girls.

In view of the above and having carefully gone through the case diary, the evidence already collected by the Investigating Officer and having heard the State and the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain the application for bail.

It is submitted by counsel for the Investigating Officer that the petitioner is in the jail hospital. There are applications pending before the Magistrate both in respect of the petitioner's allegedly ill-treatment during custody as also alleged conspiracy behind the charges against the petitioner, the Magistrate shall proceed to consider the same and deal with them in accordance with law.

Sufficient proper and effective medical attention shall be ensured to the petitioner by the State. The medical reports of the G.B.Pant Hospital are available with the Investigating Officer may be produced before the Learned Magistrate. The

petitioner shall be provided an accessible and usable toilet given his medical condition.

The Learned Magistrate shall also bear in mind the medical condition of the petitioner and ensure appropriate and further measures in that regard.

It is ordered that the investigation into the FIR should be mandatorily and positively completed within a period of two months from date.

CRM(DB)/10/2022 stands dismissed.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Rajasekhar Mantha, J. ) ( Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)