SUBHASIS DASGUPTA,J. - (1.) This revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred for quashing of the proceeding in connection with Raiganj Police Station Case No. 623 of 2018 dated 21/09/2018 under Sections 143/186/353, 427 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 8 (b) of the National Highway Act, corresponding to G.R Case No. 1310 of 2018, now pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Uttar Dinajpur at Raiganj with an interim order of stay of operation of order dated 20/12/2018 of Criminal Misc. Case No. 1896 of 2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Uttar Dinajpur cancelling the order of bail granted by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate by order dated 27/09/2018.
(2.) In response to the direction of this Court, passed earlier, learned Public Prosecutor entered his appearance in this case and contested the case.
(3.) The contention raised by learned advocate for the revisionist was that the instant prosecution was an abuse of the process of law, if allowed to be continued for any further period of time, as there was no approach made by the Police Officer to take recourse to provisions contained under Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by issuing notice upon the revisionist/accused before securing his arrest in terms of settled proposition of law laid down in Arnesh Kumar versus State of Bihar and another reported in (2014) 8 SCC 273, and further that since revisionist/accused was brought under arrest on the strength of a shown arrest, which was not recognised under the provisions of the law, the proceeding must be quashed granting compensation adequately to revisionist/accused, who already suffered insult humiliation, ignominy in the case for not making strict adherence to Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and further the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Uttar Dinajpur making cancellation of bail of revisionist/accused, already granted by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate earlier was against the principle to be followed necessarily for making cancellation of bail in exceptional cases. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submitted revealing the contention that the prayer for quashing would not be encouraging one in the given set of facts for the prima facie materials having found to exist with reference to the offence complained of, and further that learned Sessions Judge committed no illegality in its order while making cancellation of bail. Thus, according to the State in this case the perversity of the order granting bail by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 27/09/2018, when admittedly on 25/09/2018 the self-same Magistrate rejected the prayer for bail with observation that sufficient materials were there in the case diary justifying detention in custody, and accordingly, remanded to Judicial Custody till 09/10/2018, has been grossly challenged for there being no remarkable changes in circumstances within a very short span of time. ;