Introduction:

In a recent development, the Calcutta High Court has intervened in the case of local leader Mampi Das, who was arrested following allegations made by BJP leader Gangadhar Kayal in a sting operation video. The allegations implicated Das in threatening witnesses and staging protests. However, the court’s order for Das’s release sheds light on the intricacies of the legal proceedings and the application of relevant sections of the law.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the arrest under Section 195A of the IPC was unwarranted as there was no prima facie case against Das. It was contended that the provision of Section 195A applies only when there’s a threat to provide false evidence during a court proceeding, which was not the case here. The petitioner’s surrender was based on a notice under Section 41A of the CrPC, and the addition of Section 195A later was a procedural irregularity. On the other hand, the Advocate General representing the State argued that there was a prima facie case against the petitioner based on the allegations, and the notice under Section 41A was sufficient notice of the charges.

Court’s Judgement:

The court emphasized that Section 195A of the IPC applies specifically to instances where witnesses or complainants are threatened to give false evidence during court proceedings. Since there was no prima facie evidence of such threat in this case, the court found the petitioner’s arrest under this section unjustified. It highlighted the importance of careful consideration in bail and remand proceedings, emphasizing that remanding an accused should not be a mere formality. Therefore, the court stayed the proceedings under Section 195A and ordered Das’s release.