SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Banhidip Sutradhar vs Unknown on 22 January, 2019




C.R.M. 625 of 2019

In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure filed on 11.01.2019 in connection with
Barrackpore P.S. Case No.266 of 2018 dated 25.10.2018 under
Sections 498A/326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and adding Section 304B of the
Indian Penal Code.

In the matter of : Banhidip Sutradhar.

… Petitioner.

Mr. Dipak Sengupta, Sr. Adv.,
Mr. Subrata Roy,
Mr. Bholanath Ghosh.

…for the Petitioner.

Md. Anwar Hossain,
Ms. Ratna Ghosh.

…for the State.

Mr. Soubhik Mitter,
Mr. Sabir Ahmed,
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee,
Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta.

….for the de-facto complainant.

Heard the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

Petitioner renews his prayer for bail and submits that he is in

custody for 88 days and that investigation is complete. It is further

submitted that the victim made an exonerative dying declaration at

the time when she was admitted in the hospital.

Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the dying declaration of

the victim had been procured under duress and in the presence of

the accused persons.

This submission is supported by the learned Advocate

appearing for the de-facto complainant.

We have considered the materials on record. We note that the

dying declaration was recorded at the R. G. Kar Medical College and

Hospital which is exonerative in nature. No doubt the petitioner and

other accused persons were present when the said dying declaration

was recorded. Under these circumstances, voluntariness of the

deceased victim at the time of recording the dying declaration is a

question which may be gone into during trial.

However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and

bearing in mind the period of detention suffered by the petitioner and

that investigation is complete, we are inclined to grant bail to the


Accordingly, the petitioner, namely, Banhidip Sutradhar shall

be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two

sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the

satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Barrackpore subject to condition that the petitioner shall appear

before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders

and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any

manner whatsoever.

In the event the petitioner fails to appear before the Trial Court

without any justifiable cause, the trial Court shall be at liberty to

cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to

this Court.

The application, being C.R.M.625 of 2019, is disposed of.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur,J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 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