SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Indian Penal Code And Sections 3/4 … vs In Re : Ranjit Hazra on 26 November, 2019

1

26.11.2019
61

sdas
Allowed

C.R.M. 10995 of 2019

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure filed on 22.11.2019 in connection with Belda Police Station
Case No. 298 of 2019 dated 27.08.2019 under Sections 498A/Section307/Section34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/Section4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

And

In Re : Ranjit Hazra …… petitioner

Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra
…..for the petitioner

Mr. Goutam Wilson
….for the State

It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that he

has been falsely implicated in the instant case due to matrimonial dispute.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for

anticipatory bail.

Having considered the materials on record and bearing in mind the general

and omnibus nature of allegations, we are inclined in granting anticipatory bail

to him.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner shall be

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

amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the

conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
2

1973 and on further conditions that he shall meet the investigating officer once

in a week until further orders and shall appear before the court below and pray

for regular bail within a period of four weeks from date.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed.

(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
3

C.R.M. 11960 of 2017

In Re:- An application under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure filed on 28.11.2017 in connection with
Jagatballavpur Police Station Case No. 263 of 2017 dated
01.11.2017 under Sections 376/Section511 of the Indian Penal Code.

And

In Re : Aslam Ali Sk. @ Aslam Sk. …… petitioner

Mr. Kallol Mondal,
Ms. Amrita Chel
…..for the petitioner

Mr. N. P. Agarwala
….for the State

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the

allegations are patently absurd and inherently improbable.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the

prayer for bail.

We have considered the materials in the case diary and

bearing in nature of allegations in the light of the aforesaid

submission made by the learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner, we are of the opinion although custodial

interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary in the facts

of the case but movement of the petitioner requires to be

restricted to instill confidence in the mind of the victim.
4

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

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

STUDY REPORTS

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