Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Kabirul Mondal vs Unknown on 10 August, 2011

Author: Ashim Kumar Roy

Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy

37   10.08.2011                          C.R.M. 6995 of 2011
Sd
                  Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of
                  Criminal Procedure filed on 1st August, 2011 in connection with
                  Dubrajpur P.S. Case No. 49/10 dated 21.04.10 under Section
                  147/ 148/149/302/ 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
                  25/27 of the Arms Act and Section 9B(ii) of Indian Explosives Act.

                                              And

                      In the matter of : Kabirul Mondal.
                                                           .... Petitioners (in Jail).
                             Mr. Tapas Kumar Ghosh,
                             Mr. Tanmoy Chowdhury.
                                           ....For the Petitioners.

                             Mr. Souvik Mitter.
                                             ....For the State.


                             Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the
                      learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. Perused the
                      case diary.

                             The petitioners are seeking bail in connection with a
                      case relating to offence punishable under Section 147/
                      148/149/302/ 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
                      25/27 of the Arms Act and Section 9B(ii) of Indian Explosives
                      Act.

                             It is submitted that the petitioners are in custody for
                      120 days and out of 22 charge sheeted accused persons
                      about 15 are on bail.
       On the other hand learned counsel for the State
submitted that only one accused is on bail and that is due to
non-submission of charge sheet within the statutory period,
as it appears from the Case Diary. He further submitted that
this man was absconding for nearly one year and he draws
our attention to the statement of number of eye witnesses
wherefrom the petitioner's complicity in the commission of
offence has been prima facie made out.


      Accordingly, we are not inclined to allow the prayer for
bail. The prayer for bail is accordingly rejected.


      The application for bail accordingly stands rejected.



                                 (J. N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE)

(ASHIM KUMAR ROY, J.)