Calcutta High Court Upholds Bail Order in CBI case, Citing Violation of Constitutional Rights [Read Judgment]

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a revision application filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation, affirming an order granting interim bail to Rajnikant Ojha due to procedural lapses in the arrest process and emphasizing the importance of constitutional rights during arrests.

Justice Suvra Ghosh delivered the judgment on April 10, 2025, making crucial observations on the requirements for a valid arrest and the constitutional protections available to arrestees.

The court addressed the case involving a revisional application filed by the CBI against an order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, who had rejected a transit remand request and granted interim bail to Rajnikant Ojha. The court noted, “The petitioner/CBI is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas, on 29th March, 2025, in R.C. No. 220 of 2023.”

Addressing specific concerns about the arrest procedure, the court observed, “The reasons for arrest should reflect parameters viz. to prevent the accused person from committing any other offence; for proper investigation of the offence; to prevent the accused from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear or tampering with such evidence in any manner.” The court found these essential reasons absent from the memo of arrest.

The court highlighted the distinction between formal requirements and substantive rights, stating, “The warrant of arrest only refers to the penal sections and does not notify the substance of the warrant in terms of Section 75/78(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the person to be arrested.”

In a specific analysis, the court explained, “Even if it is held that the opposite party was given an opportunity to read the warrant of arrest, he was still not equipped with the knowledge of the substance thereof in order to defend himself, since the warrant is bereft of such substance.”

The court emphasized the need for compliance with constitutional mandates under Article 22 of the Constitution of India and Section 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which require proper notification of the grounds for arrest.

The CBI’s counsel argued that the arrest warrant contained sufficient information and was properly executed, while the defense countered that the accused was not informed of the grounds of arrest as required by law.

The court directed Rajnikant Ojha to appear before the concerned court in accordance with the previous order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, Mr. Amajit De, Learned Special Public Prosecutor, Mr. Pritam Roy, Advocate, and Ms. Aroshi Rathore, Advocate, appeared for the CBI, while Mr. Sounak Mondal, Advocate, and Mr. Sreyash Kumar Singh, Advocate, appeared for Rajnikant Ojha.

Case Title: Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Rajnikant Ojha

[Read Judgment]