Trial Court Should Not Issue Warrant Of Arrest Mechanically, Without Application Of Mind: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a trial court cannot issue a warrant of arrest without application of mind and justifying the same under the law.

A single bench of Justice Suvra Ghosh quashed the warrant of arrest against the petitioners, who were accused under inter alia Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code while observing that the trial court had issued the warrant of arrest against the petitioners mechanically without application of mind.

The petitioners have not been charged with offence under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code in the charge sheet and the order impugned does not disclose that they are likely to evade the process of law or tamper/destroy evidence. Admittedly the investigating officer did not consider it necessary to arrest the petitioners during investigation and no step was also taken by the Court to secure their appearance before the Court upon taking cognizance of the charge sheet. Under such circumstances, the learned Trial Court should not have issued warrant of arrest against the petitioners without justifying issuance of the same in accordance with law, the Court said.

The petitioners were aggrieved by an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Jhargram on 19th September 2023 in connection with Special Case no. 5 of 2021 issuing a warrant of arrest against them.

Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were not named in F.I.R. and no notice was served upon them upon submission of charge sheet six years after the complaint was lodged.

It was stated that though the Sessions Judge took cognizance of the chargesheet which was submitted on 6th August 2021, no summons/warrant was issued upon the petitioners for securing their presence.

On 19th September 2023, the trial Court issued a warrant of arrest against the absconding accused including the petitioners without assigning any reasons, it was argued,

It was submitted that when the petitioners were not arrested in the course of the investigation, a summons and not a warrant should be issued by the Court upon taking cognizance of the charge sheet.

It was argued that the accused against whom the chargesheet had been submitted under sections 420/406//409/467/120B of the Indian Penal Code had been granted anticipatory bail by the Court.

Counsel for the State submitted that a composite charge sheet had been submitted against all the accused including the petitioners under section 409/120B of the Code besides other offences.

It was stated that Section 409 is a heinous offence, and the trial Court rightly issued a warrant of arrest against the petitioners to secure their presence during the trial.

However, in disagreeing with these submissions, the court held that the trial court had issued the warrant of arrest without any application of mind and that the petitioners had not been charged under Section 409 IPC.

Accordingly, the court quashed the warrant.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Cal) 176

Case: Shashanka Maiti & Ors. v/s. The State of West Bengal 

Case No: CRR 1877 of 2024

Click here to read order