The Calcutta High Court has directed the State government to replace the public prosecutor in a pending murder trial after expressing deep concern over the lack of progress in the proceedings and observing that an accused person cannot be kept in custody for an indefinite period without trial. While hearing a bail application filed by Saidul Sk, also known as Chottu or Saidul Sekh, in connection with a 2021 murder case registered at Kolkata Leather Complex Police Station under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the Court noted that the trial had barely begun despite more than four years having passed since the filing of the charge sheet and that only one witness had been partly examined out of a total of 39 prosecution witnesses. The Court, presided over by Justice Tirthankar Ghosh, recorded submissions from the petitioner’s counsel that despite prolonged incarceration, there had been minimal progress in the trial and that the public prosecutor had shown little interest in advancing the case. It was further pointed out that the investigating officer’s own report reflected dissatisfaction with the manner in which the public prosecutor was handling the matter, and that the counsel for the de facto complainant had also indicated that the prosecutor was not adequately engaged in pursuing the trial.
The High Court observed that such a state of affairs could not be permitted to continue, particularly where the personal liberty of the accused was at stake, and noted the fundamental principle that an accused awaiting trial cannot be incarcerated indefinitely without meaningful progress in the legal process. Stressing the need for effective prosecution, the Court directed the Legal Remembrancer and the Judicial Secretary of the Government of West Bengal to take immediate steps to replace the existing public prosecutor and to engage a responsible and proactive prosecutor who would ensure that the trial advances in a proper and timely manner. The Court emphasised that the role of the public prosecutor is vital in presenting the case on behalf of the State and in ensuring that justice is served, and that any lack of diligence in this regard could undermine the integrity of the criminal justice system.
In issuing its direction, the High Court underscored that the failure to proceed with the examination of witnesses and the overall stagnation of the trial were matters of serious concern that directly affected the rights of the accused. The Court made clear that where an accused person remains in custody for an extended period without a substantial progression of the trial, it amounts to a denial of the right to a fair and expeditious trial. It is in light of these considerations that the Court ordered the State authorities to take urgent steps to appoint a new public prosecutor who would responsibly conduct the prosecution and facilitate the progress of the case in accordance with legal norms.
The Court also directed that its order be communicated without delay to the offices of the Legal Remembrancer and the Judicial Secretary, with a compliance report to be placed on record by the State at the earliest. Recognising the gravity of the situation and the potential impact on the bail application, the High Court further instructed that the bail matter be listed under the heading “To Be Mentioned” on January 20, 2026, by which date the State must submit its report on the steps taken to implement the directive regarding the replacement of the public prosecutor. Through these directions, the High Court highlighted the urgency of addressing administrative and procedural lapses that have contributed to the prolonged delay in the trial proceedings and underscored the judiciary’s role in safeguarding the rights of accused persons and ensuring the proper functioning of the criminal justice system.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.