Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Kalyan Mondal vs State Of West Bengal on 26 March, 2014
Author: Indrajit Chatterjee
Bench: Jayanta Kumar Biswas, Indrajit Chatterjee
1 In the High Court At Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side. Present:-
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jayanta Kumar Biswas.
and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Indrajit Chatterjee CRM No.2254 of 2014 Kalyan Mondal v.
State of West Bengal Mr. Sandip Chakraborty Mr. Balaram Sardar Mr. Eman Bhattacharyya ... for the petitioner.
Mr. Arindam Sen ... for the State.
Heard on :- March 26,2014.
Order on:- March 26,2014.
Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J:- The petitioner in the CRM saying that he is apprehending arrest in connection with Rajarhat P.S.Case No.9 of 2014 dated January 13,2014 under ss.341/325/379/354B/506 IPC is seeking bail under s.438 CrPC.
Advocate for the petitioner has submitted as follows. The petitioner and the de facto complainant are neighbours and distant relations. The relationship between the two families was not good. Alleging commission of offences under ss.147/148/149/307/323/354/379/427/120B IPC the petitioner's wife filed a complaint on November 25,2013. The de facto complainant's husband and the members of her family were accused in that case. In all six persons were named as accused.2
The criminal court passed an order dated November 25,2014 directing registration of FIR. The FIR was registered on January 23,2014 (p.16). The de facto complainant then filed a complaint under ss.341/325/354B/379/506 IPC on December 17,2013. The criminal court directed registration of an FIR. The petitioner was named as the sole accused. Accordingly, the FIR was registered on January 13,2014. The de facto complainant instituted the case because the petitioner's wife had previously instituted a case. The case has been instituted for harassing and humiliating the petitioner.
Advocate for the State has produced the case diary and relied on the materials therein.
After hearing advocates and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail.
For these reasons, we allow the CRM and direct that in the event the petitioner is arrested in connection with the case, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. Certified xerox.
sh ( Jayanta Kumar Biswas, J)
(Indrajit Chatterjee, J)
3