Kolkata, May 13 (IANS) A division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Wednesday rejected the bail-cum-relief petition of Arnab Dam alias Vikram, a jailed Maoist leader allegedly linked to the attack on an Eastern Frontier Rifles camp at Silda in West Midnapore district in 2010 during the final phase of the then Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee-led Left Front regime in West Bengal.
As many as 24 Eastern Frontier Rifles personnel were killed in the attack by armed activists of the banned left-wing extremist group.
Dam was sentenced to life imprisonment and is currently behind bars.
He moved a petition before the Calcutta High Court seeking bail and relief from the sentence against him.
He also chose to appear in person to argue his case before the Calcutta High Court division bench of Justice Apurba Sinha Ray and Justice Arijit Banerjee.
However, after a detailed hearing in the matter, the division bench ultimately rejected Dam’s bail-cum-relief petition.
The order was passed on Tuesday, though the official copy was uploaded on the Calcutta High Court website on Wednesday.
While arguing his case, Dam emphasised that his conviction was made without conducting any test identification parade and that he was identified in court almost 12 years after the Silda Eastern Frontier Rifles camp attack took place.
The counsel for the Criminal Investigation Department of the West Bengal Police opposed Dam’s submission and claimed that the evidence on record prima facie demonstrated that the petitioner was the “kingpin” and a member of the banned Maoist group.
“He and other convicts directly played a pivotal role in the act of waging war against the state,” the Criminal Investigation Department counsel argued.
Finally, the division bench observed that Dam’s argument on the test identification parade angle was not sustainable since he had been identified by at least three prosecution witnesses as being part of the group that attacked the Silda camp.
“We therefore see that at least prima facie there is sufficient incriminating evidence against this petitioner. The fact that the test identification parade was not held is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution’s case. At least two injured eyewitnesses and one independent witness identified the petitioner on the dock,” read the order copy.
“In view of the prima facie incriminating evidence against the petitioner and the exceptional gravity of the offences which the petitioner has been found to have committed, causing the death of 24 police personnel and injuring three persons, we are not inclined to allow this application for suspension of sentence. It also cannot be said that there is undue delay in the disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner, and therefore, Article 21 of the Constitution comes into play. The appeal is for 2024. It is expected that the appeal will be heard within a reasonable period of time,” the order copy added.
–IANS
src/dan
