SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Goutam Mandal & Anr vs Unknown on 19 February, 2019

1

19.02.2019

Ct.42
RP 17
Rejected
CRM 1821 of 2019
In Re : An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure in connection with Saktipur Police Station
Case No.120 of 2018 dated 17.12.2018 under
Section
498A/
304B of the Indian Penal Code.

And
In the matter of : Goutam Mandal Anr.

…. Petitioners

Mr. Koustav Bagchi, Adv.

….. For the Petitioner

Mr. S.G. Mukherjee, Ld. P.P.

Ms. Amita Gaur, Adv.

….. For the State

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner not

presses the application for bail for the petitioner No.1 (Goutam

Mondal).

Accordingly, the application for bail of petitioner no.1 stands

dismissed being “not pressed”.

The learned Advocate for the petitioner no.2 submits that the

petitioner no.2 (Palu Mondal @ Polu Mondal) is the mother-in-law of

the victim and she is aged about 70 years and she is suffering from

various ailments. He further submits that the petitioner No.2 is in

custody for 55 days.

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the State by

producing the case diary opposes the prayer for bail and submits that
2

the victim is the second wife of the petitioner no.1 and the previous

wife of the petitioner no.1 also died by committing suicide. She

further submits that there are sufficient materials in the case diary

showing involvement of the petitioner no.2 in inflicting torture and

assault upon the victim. She also submits that the investigation is at

early stage.

We have considered the submissions of the learned Advocates

appearing for the parties and have perused the case diary including

the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned

Advocates for the parties and the materials in the case diary showing

prima facie involvement of the petitioner no.2 in the alleged

commission of offence and further that the case is at the early stage

of investigation, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner no.2

at this stage.

Accordingly, the application for bail of petitioner no.2 is

rejected.

CRM 1821 of 2019 is thus disposed of.

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be

delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, upon compliance of

all formalities.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) (Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.)
3
4

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh