The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a plea by Prashanta Barman, the former block development officer accused in the kidnapping and murder of a gold trader, and directed West Bengal to act immediately on a Calcutta High Court order requiring him to surrender.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M. Pancholi questioned why the state had not enforced the High Court’s direction after Barman failed to surrender within the deadline. The bench also expressed concern over the conduct of the accused, who approached the Supreme Court on the same day that the surrender deadline expired.
“An individual has made a mockery of the entire system,” the Supreme Court observed, according to Anandabazar. The judges also questioned Barman’s lawyer about why his client had not surrendered despite an earlier direction from the top court. The bench made clear that it was not inclined to intervene against the High Court’s order and told the state to take action in accordance with it.
The Calcutta High Court had given Barman 48 hours to surrender and warned that his properties could be seized if he failed to comply. It also directed the state to stop his salary immediately. Once the deadline passed, the state was instructed to prepare a list of his properties.
Barman, who was the block development officer of Rajganj at the time, was named a principal accused in the abduction and murder of gold trader Swapan Kamliya in Dattabad, Bidhannagar, last year. The Criminal Investigation Department took over the investigation in July, but investigators were unable to arrest him. The case also drew criticism because Barman was allegedly continuing to receive his salary while remaining outside the reach of the police.
On September 10, Calcutta High Court Justice Tapobrata Chakraborty questioned the CID over the failure to locate Barman despite an arrest warrant. The judge also criticised the state government, asking why the administration had not acted against an officer who could not be traced.
Barman had earlier secured anticipatory bail from the Barasat and Bidhannagar subdivision courts. Bidhannagar Police challenged that relief in the High Court, which cancelled the anticipatory bail and ordered him to surrender. The Supreme Court subsequently directed him to surrender on January 23, but he remained unavailable to the police, according to the report.
On May 25, Barman was arrested after an alleged traffic-rule violation in the Eco Park police station area of New Town. Police said his vehicle suddenly hit a pedestrian that night. He was produced before a Barasat court the following day. However, the court did not receive the documents connected with the murder case by the evening of May 26. After waiting for the papers, the magistrate granted him bail, following which Barman returned home and again could not be traced.
The Supreme Court’s latest direction leaves enforcement of the High Court’s surrender, salary stoppage and property-related orders with the state authorities. The case will now turn on whether those directions are implemented and whether investigators are able to bring the accused before the court.
