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