SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gopal Paramanik & Anr vs Unknown on 1 May, 2018



RP 126
CRM 1451 of 2018

In Re : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Haldia P.S. Case
No.124 of 2017 dated 10.12.2017 under Sections
498A/323/406/376D/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3/
4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (Corresponding to GR Case No.1794 of

In the matter of : Gopal Paramanik Anr.

…. Petitioners

Mr. Himangshu De, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Amarendu Chakraborty, Adv.

….. For the Petitioners

Mr. Suman De, Adv.

….. For the De Facto Complainant

Ms. Kumkum Mitra, Adv.

….. for the State

Liberty to amend the cause title.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are the

friends of the husband of the de facto complainant and have been

falsely implicated in the instant case.

Learned lawyer for the de facto complainant submits that

the petitioners subjected the victim to inhuman torture including

sexual harassment.


Learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary and

opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

We have considered the materials on record. We have

perused the averments made in the application under Section

156(3) CrPC which was treated as first information report as well

as the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 CrPC.

There is no whisper as to the specific roles of the petitioners in

torturing the victim on 13.09.2017 in the first information report

lodged by her while specific allegations of sexual assault have

been made against them in her statement under Section 164

CrPC. Allegations with regard to cohabitation of the victim with

the petitioner in the first information report are woefully vague

and non-specific. In view of the aforesaid facts, we are of the

opinion that custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be

necessary but they require to cooperate with the investigation in

accordance with law.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the

petitioners shall 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 subject to the conditions laid down in sub-section (2) of

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on

further condition that they shall meet the investigation officer

once in a week until further orders.

The application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, 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