The Calcutta High Court has set aside the bail granted to a builder in a cheating and breach of trust case, holding that the liberty of an accused cannot be sustained on an order that fails basic procedural safeguards. Justice Uday Kumar ruled that the bail order passed by a Sealdah magistrate in 2018 suffered from serious procedural and substantive defects and described it as an order “born in sin”.
In a judgment delivered on March 6, the High Court cancelled the bail granted to builder Suvendu Saha by a Sealdah court on May 7, 2018, along with all subsequent orders confirming that bail. The court held that the order granting relief to the accused was legally unsustainable due to glaring irregularities in how it was recorded and authenticated.
Justice Uday Kumar noted that the impugned bail order was unsigned or only partially initialled, lacked proper reasoning on the objections raised by the victim, and ignored the background of alleged witness intimidation. According to the court, such deficiencies rendered the order perverse and contrary to judicial discipline.
“This case presents a disturbing instance where the liberty of an accused was prioritised over the safety of a victim through an order that fails the most basic tests of procedural authentication,” the High Court observed.
The court stressed that while personal liberty is an important legal principle, it cannot be protected through an order that disregards procedural safeguards laid down by the High Court. Justice Kumar said the bail order displayed “dual infirmity — procedural and substantive.”
“Therefore, this court arrives at the legal conclusion that the liberty of an accused, while precious, cannot be protected by an order that is ‘born in sin’, that is, an order passed in defiance of the High Court’s administrative and judicial discipline,” the judge stated.
The dispute arose from a redevelopment agreement involving an elderly widow who was a tenant in a house in north Kolkata. According to the petitioner, she entered into a tripartite agreement in November 2014 with a construction company owned by Saha. Under the agreement, the developer was required to shift her to temporary accommodation, pay monthly rental charges, and provide her with a self-contained flat in the redeveloped building within 24 months.
However, the petitioner alleged that after obtaining possession of her tenanted premises for redevelopment, the builder stopped paying displacement allowances and failed to deliver the promised flat. She subsequently filed a criminal complaint at the Cossipore police station in north Kolkata accusing the builder of cheating and breach of trust.
The High Court noted that Saha was arrested on May 3, 2018 only after the court intervened. However, he secured bail from the Sealdah magistrate just four days later.
Criticising the manner in which the lower court exercised its discretion, Justice Kumar observed that the magistrate had acted arbitrarily and disregarded binding legal precedents. “This court finds that the Learned Magistrate exercised his discretion arbitrarily and in defiance of binding precedents,” the judgment said.
The court also emphasised that the legitimacy of judicial orders depends not only on their reasoning but also on strict compliance with procedural requirements governing court records.
“When a subordinate court ignores the mandatory procedural safeguards established by this court to ensure the authenticity of judicial records, the resulting order is not merely irregular; it is legally infirm,” the judge observed.
Apart from cancelling the bail, the High Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Kolkata to provide adequate and continuous protection to the petitioner and her family.
The court also issued an institutional direction to strengthen judicial training. It asked the Director of the West Bengal State Judicial Academy to introduce a specific module on “Recording of Judicial Orders and Authentication of Records” in induction and refresher courses for judicial officers, highlighting the legal consequences of failing to comply with criminal rules and orders.
