Sk Atarul @ Atarul Sk vs Unknown on 20 September, 2017

1

S/L 8.

September 20, 2017. C.R.M. No. 8660 of 2017
MNS.

In re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on
August 29, 2017 in connection with Panrui Police Station Case No. 21 of 2017 dated
March 7, 2017 under
Sections 498A/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections
3/
4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

And

In the matter of: Sk Atarul @ Atarul Sk

…Petitioner.

Mr. Sabir Ahmed,
Mr. Hillo Podder,
Mr. Lotful Haque,
Mr. Habibur Rahaman,
Mr. Golam Karim Chowdhury

…for the petitioner.

Mr. Siladitya Banerjee

…for the State.

Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties.

The petitioner is seeking bail in connection with a case relating to offences
punishable under
Sections 498A/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the husband of the
victim and he is in no way connected with the case and he has been falsely implicated in the
instant case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is in
custody for sixty-one days and the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet
has been submitted and there is no need of further detention of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and also considering the entire
facts and circumstances of the case and the materials in the case diary and that the investigation has been
2

completed and the charge-sheet has been submitted, we are of the opinion that further detention of the
accused/petitioner is not required.

Accordingly, the accused/petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs
.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount, one of whom must be local, having sufficient
immovable property, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Suri,
Birbhum, on conditions that after being released on bail, the accused/petitioner shall not
tamper with the evidence and make any inducement or threat to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case and he shall attend the court below on each and every occasion unless
prevented by sufficient cause, failing which the learned court below shall be at liberty to
cancel the bail of the petitioner without any further reference to this Court.

This application for bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Rajiv Sharma, J.)

(Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *