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)

An Application For Anticipatory Bail ... vs In Re : Arshad Seikh & Others on 9 June, 2016

Author: Patherya

Bench: Patherya

                                                              1

9.06.2016                                                           C.R.M. No. 2922 of 2016
 ALLOWED


In the matter of : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed 15th
April, 2016 in connection with Khargram Police Station Case No. 51 of 2016 dated 18.2.2016 under Sections
341/323/325/326/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code being G.R. case No. 315 of 2016.


               And

 In Re : Arshad Seikh & Others

                                       .... Petitioners.

         Mr. Manas Ku mar Das
                        ....For the petitioners.

         Mr. Sekhar Barman
                      .... For the State.



         Apprehending arrest in connection with Khargram Police Station Case No. 51 of 2016 dated 18.2.2016 under

Sections 341/323/325/326/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code being G.R. case No. 315 of 2016, this application for

anticipatory bail has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

         At the very outset the learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no. 1 has already been

arrested and, accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail in respect of the petitioner no. 1 is rejected being not pressed.

         The learned Advocate for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners being neighbours of the de-facto

complainant have been falsely implicated in connection with this case and they are innocent.

         The learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary and draws our attention to the injury report of the

victim at page 17 of the case diary and the statement of the victim girl, recorded under Section 161 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure at page 6 of the case diary.

         Having considered the submissions of the parties and considering the nature of the injury, we are of the

considered opinion that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners will not be necessary for further effective

investigation of this case. Thus, we find it a fit case to enlarge the petitioners, namely, the petitioner No. 2, Nusai Sk. @

Musai Sk; the petitioner no. 3, Laxmi Bibi @ Laxminur Bibi and petitioner no. 4, Rintu Sk, on anticipatory bail, in the

event of their arrest they be released on bail upon furnishing of bond to the tune of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties
                                                               2

of Rs. 2,500/- each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority and subject to the conditions imposed under Section

438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

         The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected being not pressed in respect of the petitioner no. 1 and the prayer

for anticipatory bail is allowed in respect of the petitioner nos. 2, 3 and 4 and the application is, thus, disposed of.

         Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis. .



                                                   ( Patherya, J)




                                                      (Debi Prosad Dey, J.)




         .

3