Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
The Mpo Act vs Allowed In Re : Subrata Chattaraj on 10 January, 2020
1 10.01.2020
tkm/ct 28 C.R.M. 245 of 2020 sl no. 47
In Re : An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 8.1.2020 in connection with Santiniketan P.S case no. 120 of 2019 dated 11.9.2019 under sections 143/144/145/153A/185/189/295A/332/34/353/308 of the Indian Penal Code, sections 3/4 of the ES Act, section 3/4 of the PAPP Act and section 9 of the MPO Act And Allowed In Re : Subrata Chattaraj ...... petitioner Mr. Tapas Kr. Ghosh Mr. T Chowdhury ...... for the petitioner Mr. M Sur Mr. M Mahata ...... for the State It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail.
Learned lawyer for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Having considered materials on record and bearing in mind the nature of allegations and the extent of complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime and as co-accused persons have been granted pre-arrest bail, we are inclined to extend the same privilege to the petitioner also.
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 subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and that the petitioner shall appear before the court below and pray for regular bail within four weeks from date.
The application being CRM 245 of 2020 is disposed of. (Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 2