SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

(G.R. Case No. 6788 Of 2018) vs In Re: Baddanath Dutta on 4 February, 2019

1

04.02.19

Sl. No.154
akd
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. 522 of 2019

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 11.01.2019 in connection with Jagatdal Police Station Case No. 1270
dated 11.11.2018 under Sections 341/323/498A/406/313/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(G.R. Case No. 6788 of 2018)

And

In Re: Baddanath Dutta
… … Petitioner
Ms. Minoti Gomes .. Advocate
Mr. Susanta Kumar Pal .. Advocate
… … for the petitioner

Mr. S. S. Imam .. Advocate
Mr. Mirza Firoj Ahmed Begg .. Advocate
… … for the State

Heard the learned advocate appearing for both the parties.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is the husband of the victim-

housewife and that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further

submitted that the allegation of physical assault on the pregnant lady resulting in

miscarriage is patently absurd and inherently improbable.

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and

submits that the victim-housewife was subjected to assault on 23rd June, 2018 and 28th

June, 2018 resulting in miscarriage. He relies on the USG reports of the victim in that

regard.

We have considered the materials on record. We do not find any averment in

the FIR that the victim-housewife was subjected to USG examination on 23rd June, 2018 –

the day on which she was physically assaulted resulting in miscarriage. There was no
2

hospitalisation of the victim thereafter. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to give

credence to the medical reports collected in the course of investigation. Keeping in mind

the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that custodial

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

case and he may be granted anticipatory bail.

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

Baddanath Dutta, be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the

arresting officer and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on further condition that he shall meet the

Investigating Officer once in a week until further orders.

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

(Abhijit Gangopadhyay, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Leave a Reply

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

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