Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Swapan Kumar Saha vs Unknown on 20 December, 2013
Author: Joymalya Bagchi
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi
1 161 20.12.2013
sm C.R.M.15872 of 2013 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed 04.12.2013 in connection with Salboni Police Station Case No.226/2013 dated 30.09.2013 under section 415/420/423/424/ 425/ 427/441/463/464/466/469/448 read with sections 43/65/72 of Information Technology Act and sections 65A/65B of the Indian Evidence Act.
In the matter of: Swapan Kumar Saha .... petitioner.
Mr.Navanil De .. for the petitioner.
Mr.Debajyoti Deb .. for the State.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case papers.
Having considered the materials in the case diary prima facie disclosing involvement of the petitioner in the alleged tampering and forging of electronics records/document, we are of the view that this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
(Joymalya Bagchi,J.) 2 (Sahidullah Munshi, J.) 189 20.12.2013 sm C.R.M.15959 of 2013 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed 05.12.2013 in connection with Domjur Police Station Case No.860/ 2013 dated 04.11.2013 under section 498A/307/34 of Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
In the matter of: Manas Chakraborti & Anr..... petitioners.
Mr.Sekhar Basu Mr.Subhasish Roy .. for the petitioners.
Mr.Soumik Ganguli .. for the State.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case papers.
3It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are the brother-in-law, son-in-law of the victim housewife and they are in no way connected in the matrimonial life of the couple. It is further submitted that she suffered accidental burn and the instant case has been belatedly registered.
Having considered the materials in the case diary including the version relating to the allegation of setting the de facto complainant on fire, we find that the said allegation has been levelled against the husband and mother-in-law and bearing in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioners, we are of the view that their custodial interrogation for progress of investigation may not be necessary.
Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) each with one surety 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.
This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Joymalya Bagchi,J.) (Sahidullah Munshi, J.) 4