Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sections 3/ 4 Pdpp Act And Section 9 Mpo ... vs In Re : Saokat Mondal & Anr on 4 July, 2022
Author: Debangsu Basak
Bench: Debangsu Basak
04.07.2022 28 Ct. No. 29 KAUSHIK REJECTED C.R.M.(A) 3131 of 2022 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Thanarpara Police Station Case No. 100 of 2017 dated 21.06.2017 under Sections 147/148/149/323/333/186/353/332/307/435/ 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/ 4 of the E.S. Act and Sections 3/ 4 PDPP Act and Section 9 MPO Act.
And In Re : Saokat Mondal & Anr.
...... petitioners Mr. Bibaswan Bhattacharya ....for the petitioners Mr. Neiguive Ahmed Mr. Iqbal Kabir Ms. Kumkum Mitra ....for the State Petitioners pray for anticipatory bail. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, one co-accused was granted anticipatory bail in CRM 6618 of 2017 on August 17, 2017. The police filed charge-sheet in 2021. The petitioners were not aware of their involvement in the present police case.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that, the petitioners are named in the First Information Report. He refers to the statement of the eye witness recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). He submits that, the petitioner stands on the same footing as the other co- accused prayer for anticipatory bail was not granted. 2 Considering the long absconsion of the petitioners, the involvement of the petitioners in the offence as transpiring from the materials in the case diary, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to any of the petitioners.
Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected and the application being CRM (A) 3131 of 2022 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)