KALATAN DASGUPTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, represented by Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Learned Senior Counsel, is a prominent leader of the Democratic Youth Federation. He has been wrongfully implicated in a politically motivated criminal case, registered as Electronic Complex Police Station Case No. 173/24 on 13/9/2024, under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), including Ss. 224, 352, 353(a)(b)(2), 351(2), 196, and 61. The petitioner has actively participated in peaceful demonstrations opposing the State authorities' failure to ensure workplace safety for women. This protest gained momentum after the tragic rape and murder of a postgraduate trainee doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024. Along with other members of civil society, the petitioner has led the movement, demanding justice for the victim and transparency in the investigation. The investigation was later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) by an order of the Hon'ble High Court.

(2.) On 13/9/2024, at approximately 14:15 hours, Sub-Inspector Preetam Singh of the Electronic Complex Police Station received information that one Sanjib Das had spoken to the petitioner, Kalatan Dasgupta, over the phone about organizing a violent attack at Swastha Bhawan, Salt Lake, Sector V, Kolkata, where protests were taking place. The alleged attack included plans to target public servants, specifically doctors. Based on this information, call diary records were retrieved, and a pen drive containing the conversation and its transcript was obtained. Subsequently, a case was registered against both, one Sanjib Das and the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner herein assails the illegal actions of the respondent authorities, specifically the Bidhannagar Police Commissionerate (Respondent No. 3), in effectuating his arrest in blatant disregard of procedural safeguards. The petitioner asserts that the arrest is in direct contravention of the legal principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, which prescribes strict adherence to procedural protocols for arrests in cases involving offenses punishable by imprisonment of up to seven years. It is further submitted that all charges mentioned in the FIR, save one, are bailable and noncognizable under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The solitary non-bailable charge carries a maximum sentence of three years, thus necessitating compliance with the guidelines in Arnesh Kumar (supra), as the threshold for a custodial arrest had not been met. Moreover, the said non-bailable offense was subsequently included in the seizure list, and as such, the respondent police authorities could not have added this Sec. without prior permission or an order from the learned Magistrate, thereby committing a gross violation of procedural mandates, including the issuance of notice under Sec. 35 of the BNSS, 2023, as well as affording the accused a prior opportunity to respond.