Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
14.07.2021 CRM 2390 of 2021
(Via Video Conference)
Court No.28
Item No.18
In Re:- An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Palashipara Police
Skb
Station Case No. 310 of 2020, dated 18.10.2020 under Sections
As 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
And
In the matter of : Kartick Saha Anr.
…Petitioners
Mr. Sekhar Kr. Basu, Sr. Adv.,
Mr. Prabir Majumder,
Mr. Snehansu Majumder.
…For the Petitioners
Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharyya,
Mr. Nirupam Dhali.
…For the State.
The petitioners have filed the instant application for bail
under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after being
arrested in connection with Palashipara Police Station Case No.
310 of 2020, dated 18.10.2020 under Sections 498A/304B/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
This is an application making renewal of the prayer for bail,
after it was rejected lastly on 27th January, 2021.
Mr. Sekhar Kr. Basu, Learned Senior Advocate appearing
for the petitioners submits that the parents-in-law have been
falsely implicated in this case in consequence of a strained
matrimonial relationship of the deceased victim with their son/
husband, who is already in custody. It is further submitted that
charge sheet has already been submitted and as such, further
detention of the petitioners is unnecessary. According to the
petitioners, they are in custody since 19th October, 2020 and in
2
the absence of any overt act performed attributable to the conduct
of the parents-in-law, further detention would be an unnecessary
exercise.
Learned Advocate for the State raises objection against the
prayer for bail submitting that the deceased victim suffered death
receiving burn injuries eight months after her marriage. The
victim was put to suffer oppression and cruelty by her in law
members including the petitioners. The statement of the
neighbours recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure and Autopsy report are thus brought to our attention
to re-enforce the objection against the prayer for bail.
Having considered the submissions of both sides and
bearing in mind the extent of role of petitioners, whom we
perceive to be not similarly circumstanced with that of husband of
deceased victim, and the period of detention already undergone
and that there is least possibility of conclusion of trial
immediately, further detention of the petitioners is not justified.
The prayer for bail of the petitioners is thus allowed.
Accordingly, the petitioners Kartick Saha and Sumitra
Saha, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of
Rs.10,000 /- each (Rupees Ten Thousand), with two court
sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tehatta, Nadia subject to the
condition that the petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court
on every date of hearing until further orders.
In the event the petitioners fail to do so without any
3
justifiable cause, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to pass
necessary order in accordance with law without any further
reference to this Court.
The application for bail, being CRM 2390 of 2021, is thus
disposed of.
(Harish Tandon, J)
(Subhasis Dasgupta,J.)