Sl No. 904.
C.R.M. 6836 of 2017
In the matter of : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
In the matter of: 1. Bablu Saha,
2. Hasi Saha,
3. Sadhan Saha……….petitioners.
Mr. Navanil De,
Ms. Ayantika Roy. ….. for the petitioners.
Mr. Sudip Ghosh,
Mr. Shekhar Barman. ….. for the State.
Apprehending arrest in course of investigation of Khargram Police Station
FIR No. 58 dated 15.02.2017 under Sections 498A/302/304B/34 of the Indian
Penal Code, the petitioners (parents-in-law and brother-in-law of the victim) have
applied for anticipatory bail.
Mr. De, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that since the
petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have been arrested during the pendency of the
application, their prayer may be dismissed as infructuous.
In that view of the matter, the prayer for direction made by the petitioner
nos. 1 and 2 stands dismissed as infructuous.
We have heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the materials
in the case diary, more particularly the statement of the mother of the victim
recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Having regard to the extent of complicity of the petitioner no. 3, as revealed
from such case diary, we are of the considered opinion that custodial
interrogation of the petitioner no. 3 is not necessary for effective and meaningful
investigation of the F.I.R.; hence, he is entitled to direction as prayed for in this
It is, accordingly, directed that in the event of arrest of the
petitioner no. 3, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs.5,000/-,
with two sureties of like amount, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction
of the of the arresting officer and also subject to the conditions as laid down in
sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
C.R.M. 6836 of 2017 is, thus, disposed of.
( Dipankar Datta, J.)
( Debi Prosad Dey, J. )