Calcutta High Court Denies Relief To Convict In 2010 Maoist Attack At EFR Camp Which Killed 24 Security Personnel
The Calcutta High Court has refused to suspend the sentence of alleged Maoist leader Arnab Dam, convicted in the 2010 Silda EFR camp attack case in which 24 security personnel were killed, observing that injured eyewitnesses are likely to remember the faces of attackers involved in “such a major terrorist attack.”A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha...
The Calcutta High Court has refused to suspend the sentence of alleged Maoist leader Arnab Dam, convicted in the 2010 Silda EFR camp attack case in which 24 security personnel were killed, observing that injured eyewitnesses are likely to remember the faces of attackers involved in “such a major terrorist attack.”
A Division Bench of Justice Arijit Banerjee and Justice Apurba Sinha Ray rejected Dam's plea for suspension of sentence pending appeal, noting the “exceptional gravity” of the offences and the prima facie incriminating evidence against him.
The Court said: “It is not unusual or improbable that the injured eye witnesses would remember the faces of some of the miscreants involved in such a major terrorist attack on a police camp. In fact, an injured witness is more likely to remember the details of the incident and the faces of the people involved therein.”
Dam and 22 others were convicted under various provisions of the IPC, the Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist)-linked conspiracy charges, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the Explosive Substances Act and the Arms Act for allegedly participating in the February 15, 2010 attack on the Silda camp of the Eastern Frontier Rifles. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Appearing in person, Dam argued that no Test Identification Parade (TIP) had been conducted and that he was identified in Court nearly 12 years after the incident. He further contended that he had remained on bail for nearly five years during trial without misusing liberty and that the trial court itself had described the evidence against him as weak. The petitioner also highlighted that he is a PhD scholar at University of Burdwan researching conservation of forests and forest resources in India.
Opposing the plea, the State submitted that Dam was a “renowned leader” and “think tank” of the banned Maoist organization and that at least four prosecution witnesses had identified him in Court. The prosecution also alleged that he was arrested with AK-47 rifles and ammunition and was facing several other criminal cases involving offences such as waging war against the State and murder.
The Bench referred to the testimonies of injured eyewitnesses and an independent witness who identified Dam during trial. One witness, an EFR personnel injured in the attack, testified that Maoists stormed the camp with bombs and firearms, killing 24 personnel and looting weapons.
Rejecting the argument regarding absence of TIP, the Court held that non-holding of a test identification parade was not fatal to the prosecution case since injured eyewitnesses and an independent witness had identified the petitioner in dock.
The Bench further observed that there was no undue delay in disposal of the appeal so as to attract Article 21 concerns, noting that the appeal was filed in 2024 and was expected to be heard within a reasonable time.
While dismissing the application, the Court directed jail authorities to provide reasonable facilities to enable Dam to continue his PhD research from the correctional home.
Case Title: Arnab Dam v. The State of West Bengal
Case No.: CRA(DB) 123 of 2024 with CRAN 1 of 2024