SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Samir Mukherjee & Anr vs Unknown on 22 August, 2017



CRM No. 7991 of 2017

In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure filed on 09.08.2017 in connection with Barasat
P.S. Case No. 484/17 dated 15.05.17 under Sections
498A/304B/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of
the Dowry Prohibition Act.


In the matter of:- Samir Mukherjee Anr. Petitioners

Ms. Sreyashee Biswas,
Ms. Maitrayee Mahata for the petitioners

Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld. P.P.,
Mr. Partha Pratim Das,
Mr. Arindam Sen for the State

Heard the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

Perused the case diary.

The petitioners are the parents-in-law. They are in custody

for 88 days.

After submission of the charge sheet for an offence

punishable under Sections 304B/306 IPC, the police has now filed

supplementary charge sheet under Sections 302/34 IPC. According to

the learned counsel for the State, supplementary charge sheet was

submitted after obtaining the opinion of the Post Mortem Doctor.

He further submits that in the Post Mortem Report, the Doctor has

not opined whether the death was homicidal, suicidal or accidental

except that few injuries on the person of the deceased were found

which were due to scuffling.

Now going through the opinion of the Doctor, on the strength

of which the supplementary charge sheet has been filed, we find

the Doctor in his opinion categorically disclosed that he is

unable to ascertain whether death was homicidal, suicidal or

accidental. Our attention has been drawn from the side of the

State from the statement of one of the neighbouring people, who

has been residing on the next house, which is at page 72 of the

case diary. Going through the same, we find, according to that

witness she heard the voice of the mother, namely, the petitioner

no. 2, who was uttering at the time of the incident “eki korli re”

i.e. she was charging someone for committing mischief.

Now having regard to that and other materials collected

during investigation, while we allow the prayer for bail of the

petitioner no. 2, Kakali Mukherjee, the same in respect of the

petitioner no. 1, Samir Mukherjee stands rejected.

Let the petitioner no. 2, Kakali Mukherjee be released on

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

Rs. 5,000/- each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of

the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barasat, North 24-


The application for bail is thus disposed of.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)

(Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J.)

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
MyNation Times Magzine

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


Copyright © 2024 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