Kolkata, Jan. 27 -- The Calcutta High Court has rejected a bail plea in a 2013 murder case, holding that the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is not absolute, particularly where allegations suggest the offence was committed to eliminate a prosecution witness in an earlier murder case.

Justice Tirthankar Ghosh passed the order in a case arising from the killing of a Raiganj-based cable television businessman on January 4, 2013.

According to the prosecution, the victim was returning home in his car with an employee and his driver when a white Ambassador car blocked their vehicle. Several assailants then rushed towards the car, broke open its windows and fired indiscriminately. The victim sustained multiple bullet injuries and later died while being taken to North Bengal Medical College.

The complaint alleged that the assailants were led by the present accused, accompanied by another named individual and others whose faces were covered. It was further alleged that the accused abused and threatened those accompanying the victim during the attack. The complainant said she received details of the incident from the employee and the driver, both eyewitnesses, who claimed they could identify the assailants, having seen them under streetlights.

Seeking bail, the accused argued that he had been in custody since February 2013 and that incarceration for nearly 13 years violated his right to a speedy trial.

Opposing the plea, the State and the de facto complainant submitted that the accused was also facing trial in an earlier murder case involving a photojournalist linked to the same cable network, and that the present victim was a key witness in that case. It was alleged that the 2013 murder was committed while the accused was on bail in the earlier matter to eliminate the witness.

The court noted that the trial had reached an advanced stage, with prosecution evidence concluded, the accused examined, and arguments partly heard. It held that parity with co-accused released on bail was not available, as the petitioner's role was central to the prosecution case.

Holding that prolonged custody alone could not override the gravity of the allegations, the court dismissed the bail plea.

Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.