RAGHUNATH RAY, J. - (1.) ACCUSED Tarun Roy, the petitioner has sought for pre-arrest bail apprehending police arrest in connection with Anandapur P.S. Case No. 36 of 2011 dt. 6.6.2011 under Sections 147/149/448/326/307/302/506/201/120B IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act corresponding to GR Case No. 1364 of 2011.
(2.) IN support of the applicants prayer for anticipatory bail, it is argued by Mr. Roy that Sri Susanta Ghosh, co-accused of this case was granted anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 18.7.2011 since Sri Ghosh was not named in the FIR dated 26.9.2002 lodged by Chandana Acharya, the daughter of Ajay Acharya since deceased and the court was not in a position even to form a reasonable suspicion as regards complicity of Sri Ghosh. According to him, the case of the present petitioner also stands on similar footing. There is nothing on record to suggest that the petitioner Tarun Roy was involved in killing the members of a rival political party on 22.9.2002. His name also does not figure in the aforementioned FIR which formed the basis of Keshpur P.S. Case No. 61/2002 dt. 26.9.2002 under Sections 149/448/326/307/364/506 IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Even though the FIR was lodged against 19 persons named therein & ors., chargesheet dated 9.2.2005 under Sections 148/149/448/364 IPC was filed against 7 persons and all of them were ultimately acquitted of the charges vide order dated 21.5.2010 passed in S.T. No. V/October 2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Paschim Medinipore (Annexure E to the petition). It is also argued by him that the alleged recovery of skeletons took place after the expiry of about 9 years of the alleged incident and that too after the change of political scenario in the State. In fact, the persons named in the inordinately delayed FIR lodged by Shyamal Acharya, s/o. deceased Ajay Acharya on 6.6.2011 are the political activists having allegiance to the party in opposition. No materials are also forthcoming as to how skeletons were available at the place of recovery. That apart, in view of judgment and order dated 21.5.2010 acquitting all the FIR named accused in Sessions Trial case No. V/Oct./05, the present FIR lodged afresh on the self-same allegations against the petitioner and other FIR named accused of earlier case appears to be politically motivated. It is further submitted by him that the purported DNA report identifying some of recovered skeletons/skulls/bones as of Ajay Acharya and Swapan @ Raju Singh cannot be a conclusive proof. According to him, the DNA test can only say whether recovered skulls/bones etc. belong to a male or female. It is, however, submitted by him that after taking into consideration the materials collected by the Investigating Agency after 18.7.2011 the court is to find out the extent and nature of the petitioners involvement, if any, in commission of offences alleged against him.
(3.) ON the contrary, Mr. Roy, learned P.P. seriously opposes the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner on the ground that the materials so far collected by the C.I.D. are sufficiently strong to connect him with the commission of offences alleged in the FIR of Anadapur P.S. Case No. 36/11 dated 6.6.11 under Sections 147/148/149/448/307/302/506/201/120B IPC read with Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. It is forcefully submitted by him that on 04.06.11, some skeletons/bones/skulls together with the remnants of wearing apparels of the victims were recovered being exhumed and all such recovered skeletons, skulls etc. were also sent to Midnapore Medical College Hospital for P.M. Examination. However, through oral evidence of eye-witnesses the Investigation Agency was able to find out the identity of as many as 7 persons namely, (i) Ajoy Acharya; (ii) Swapan @ Raju Singh; (iii) Sk. Alauddin Gayen; (iv) Sk. Taju.; (v) Nabakumar Laha; (vi) Dilu @ Dilawar Sk. and (vii) Bham @ Sukur Ali Sk. who were killed by FIR named accused in broad day light on 22.9.2002 at about 10.30 A.M. Out of these seven persons, the deadbodies of Sk. Alauddin Gayen and Sk. Taju were found lying near the P.O., while the rest five deadbodies remained untraceable for all these nine years. Three injured persons, viz. (i) Ram Sani, (ii) Arup Ghosh and (iii) Kedarnath Samui who were also chased alongwith the deceased on that fateful day of carnage, however, survived. Their statements were recorded under Sections 161 CrPC. Two injured persons namely Ram Sani and Arup Ghosh also gave statement in terms of Section 164 CrPC. In course of investigation, the biological fluid samples (blood) of the near relatives of suspected deceased were drawn and sent to Central Forensic Laboratory (CFSL, Kolkata) on 16.6.11 for DNA profiling/test with that of the recovered skeletons/bones and also for superimposition of recovered skulls for conclusive identity of the suspected deceased. The DNA report received subsequently from CFSL confirmed identity of two victims since deceased, namely, Ajay Acharya and Swapan @ Raju Singh.;