SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Samir Ghosh vs Unknown on 19 June, 2019


35 19.06.2019
rkd Ct. No.40 C.R.R. 2850 of 1998
(CRAN 1410 of 2019)

In the matter of: – Samir Ghosh

Mr. J. N. Chatterjee,
Mr. A. Bose
…for the petitioner.

Mr. R. Mukherjee, A.P.P.,
Ms. D. Sahu
…for the State.

Petitioner has prayed for bail.

It appears that the petitioner was convicted in Sessions

Trial No.238 of 1992 for commission of offences under Sections

498A/Section304B of the Indian Penal Code. The order of conviction and

sentence was affirmed on 26th November, 1998 by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Hooghly in Criminal

Appeal no.56 of 1995.

The convict/petitioner approached before this Court by

filing application under Sections 401/Section482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure which was registered as CRR 2850 of 1998.

The convict/petitioner was enlarged on bail till the disposal of

aforesaid revisional application. On 18th April, 2016 the said

revisional application was dismissed for default. On 15th

September, 2016 trial court issued warrant of arrest against the

convict/petitioner. on 30th August, 2018 the convict/petitioner

was brought under arrest and he has been sent to jail to serve

out the sentence. In the meantime the revisional application as

preferred by the convict/petitioner has been restored to its file

and number.

Learned counsel appearing for the convict/petitioner

moves the application for bail of the convict on the ground that

he is aged about 80 years and he is in jail custody for more than

300 days. He has prayed for release on bail on any condition.

According to the contention of the learned counsel

appearing for the convict/petitioner that due to the fault on the

part of the administration LCR was not brought from the trial

court and as such the revisional application was not heard in


Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that for

proper appreciation of the bail of the convict, the perusal of the

deposition of the prosecution witnesses is necessary. He has

opposed the prayer for bail of the convict/petitioner. There was

concurrent views of two different courts regarding the guilt of the


However, considering the submissions made by the

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned

counsel appearing for the State, I think the main application

requires to be disposed of as early as possible.

Let the main application appear in the list on 1st July,

2019 as “Contested Application”(specially fixed).

The petitioner is directed to deposit the cost of the special

messenger within two days so that the LCR may be brought from

the trial court and be placed before this Court on the date of


Department is directed to take immediate steps for

bringing the LCR as soon as the cost of special messenger is

deposited by the convict/petitioner.

At this stage, I do not like to pass any separate order

regarding the prayer for bail. The matter will be considered on 1st

July, 2019.

(Madhumati Mitra, J.)

Leave a Reply

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

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