1
30.01.2019. C.R.A. No. 150 of 2018
rc. with
CRAN No. 1736 of 2018
In the matter of: Ijarul Mallick@ Ejarul Mallick .
…Petitioner.
-Versus
The State of West Bengal Anr.
Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta
Mr. Prajnadeepta Roy …for the Appellants
Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury
Mr. Shiladitya Banerjee … for the State
This is an application under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure arising out of Criminal Appeal being CRA No. 150 of 2018
whereunder and whereby the appellants has assailed the judgment and order
dated 26.02.2018 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Mekhliganj, Coochbehar, in Sessions Trial No. 5(1) of 2017
corresponding to Sessions Case No. 05 of 2017 arising out of Mekhliganj Police
Station Case No. 252 of 2016 dated 02.09.2016, thereby convicting the
appellant for commission of offences punishable under Section 370(2)/370A(2)
of the Indian Penal Code sentencing the appellant to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for a period of 7 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to
suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of 1 month for commission of
offences punishable under Section 370(2) of the Indian Penal Code and also to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay fine of Rs.
5000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of one month
for commission of offences punishable under section 370A(2) of the Indian
Penal Code with a direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently and
2
also acquitting the appellant of the charge so framed against him under Section
498A of the Indian Penal Code.
The case was instituted at the instance of the father of the victim lady
who is admittedly major lady already married having child.
Having heard Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta, learned advocate for the petitioner
and Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury, learned advocate for the State who has
drawn my attention to the observation made in inner page 12 of the impugned
judgment to the effect that the victim lady being a major and married lady
having a child it was not possible for the accused to have influenced her and to
bring her from her house unless she herself had willingness to go with the
accused. It is also observed that the victim lady had been calling her father also
over telephone and talking to him but despite that she had never stated
anything about being forced into prostitution by the accused.
In view of such observation as depicted from the judgment itself there is
a scope of success and accordingly considering that the appellant is in custody
for last 2 years 5 months, the prayer for bail is considered and allowed.
Accordingly, the accused persons/petitioners be released on bail upon
furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each,
one of whom is to be local subject to the satisfaction of the learned Additional
District Sessions Judge, Mekhliganj, Coochbehar on conditions that they will
attend the court of the learned Additional District Sessions Judge, Mekhliganj,
Coochbeh until further order or till the hearing of the appeal whichever is earlier.
Let the appeal be made ready for its hearing.
3
Lower Court Record though called for has not been received.
Department is directed to take steps for calling for the Lower Court
Record to prepare the requisite number of Paper Book so as to make the
appeal ready for hearing.
Thus, CRAN No. 1736 of 2018 is disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made
available to the parties upon compliance of the requisite formalities.
(Shivakant Prasad, J.)
