Cops arrest man 14 years after court warrant, Calcutta HC bins case against him

KOLKATA: Calcutta High Court on Wednesday quashed a narcotics-related case against a person who was arrested 14 years after a warrant was issued against him by a local court in 2010.

The HC sarcastically told Bengal Police there was no law in the country that required a court to issue reminders to cops to execute warrants.

Kajim Sheikh, 35, was named in a 2010 FIR in Murshidabad’s Jalangi police station following the recovery of narcotics from a private vehicle. The two accused persons then apprehended had named Sheikh and police subsequ-ently moved court claiming that he, too, needed to be arrested.

The court issued a warrant on Sept 2, 2010, but She-ikh was not arrested till March 22, 2024.

On Wednesday, the state counsel cited two reasons to justify the 14-year delay in arrest. The Jalangi police station, he said, was split into Jalangi and Sagarpara police stations in 2020. The FIR was tagged to Sagarpara police station, but the warrant was issued to Jalangi police to execute, and hence the delay.Justice Apurba Sinha Ray asked, “Is it a ground at all? The warrant of arrest was issued on Sep 2, 2010 and the bifurcation of the police station took place in 2020.

For 10 years, the police were idle. Is it a fault of the applicant or is it a fault of the court (which issued the warrant)? These reasons cannot be accepted, particularly when the matter involves the liberty of a person.”The second reason, the state counsel said, was that the accused was absconding for 14 years and so could not be arrested. He prayed that Sheikh’s prayer for quashing of proceedings be disallowed. Sheikh disputed the claim stating that he had lived in his house under Sagarpara police station for all these years and had never been contacted by police.The HC held, “If the investigating officer or concerned police personnel remains inactive for a prolonged period, the court should exercise its discretion in favour of the accused person who was merely named by another apprehended accused and no material evidence was collected against him.”