SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

2018 Dated 16.12.2018 Under … vs In Re: Ujjal Banerjee & Anr on 13 February, 2019



Sl. No.135
C. R. M. 1698 of 2019

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 07.02.2019 in connection with Pandua Police Station Case No. 653 of
2018 dated 16.12.2018 under Sections 498A/406/323 of the Indian Penal Code.


In Re: Ujjal Banerjee Anr.

… … Petitioners
Mr. Suman Chakraborty .. Advocate
… … for the petitioners

Mr. M. A. Imran Siddiqui .. Advocate
… … for the de-facto complainant

Mr. Sandip Chakraborty .. Advocate
… … for the State

Heard the learned advocate appearing for the respective parties.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the allegations of torture are out

and out false and that the principal accused i.e. the husband is in custody.

Learned advocate for the de-facto complainant submits that all the stridhan

articles have not been recovered.

In rebuttal, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the stridhan articles

have already been recovered.

Learned advocate for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer

for anticipatory bail.

Having considered the materials on record and bearing in mind the extent of

complicity of the petitioners in the alleged crime, we are of the opinion although custodial

interrogation of the accused/petitioners may not be necessary in the facts of the present

case, they require to cooperate with the investigation in accordance with law.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the accused/petitioners,

namely (1) Ujjal Banerjee (2) Moumita Dey @ Maya Rani Dey, be released on bail

upon furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each, with two sureties

of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the

conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

and on further condition that the petitioner no.1 shall meet the Investigating Officer once in

a week until further orders.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Manojit Mandal, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation