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 7, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

An Application For Bail Under Section ... vs Naresh Balodia on 16 February, 2017

Author: Nishita Mhatre

Bench: Nishita Mhatre

                                                 1

 16.02.2017
 Item No.02
 Court No.1
  A.B.
                           CRM No. 9915 of 2016
                               (ASSIGNED)

In the matter of: An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 22.11.2016.
                                     And
In the matter of: Naresh Balodia
                                                  Petitioner
                              - versus -
                  Central Bureau of Investigation
                                                 Opposite Party
Mr.   Milon Mukherjee
Mr.   Thirthankar Ghosh
Mr.   S. K. Das
Mr.   Bappaditya Banerjee
Mr.   Satudra Lahiri
                                  For the Petitioner
Mr.   K. Raghava Charyulu
Mr.   Asraf Ali
                                  For the C.B.I.

         The Petitioner has applied for bail in connection with RC Case No. 04(S) of

2014 under Sections 420/120B/406/409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and

Section 4/6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act,

1978.

         We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner is an

advocate and was the legal consultant of the Sarada Group. He has applied for

bail on the ground that his medical condition is deteriorating. According to him

no useful purpose would be served by detaining him any further in custody.

         The petitioner was arrested on 12th December, 2014. He has been in

custody for 800 days. His last bail application was rejected by us on 5th August,

2016 after perusing the case diary.

         The medical report submitted by the medical officer Dum Dum Central

Correctional Home is placed before us. In this report it has been mentioned that

the petitioner has undergone biopsy on 16th December, 2016 for Prostratomegaly




                                                 1
                                          2


and he has been advised to consult the OPD surgery of S.S.K.M. Hospital. He has

also been diagnosed with a right sided indirect Inguinal Hernia for which

corrective surgery is required. This report is dated 24.01.2017 a further report

dated 06.02.2017 indicates that after being examined in the O.P.D. he has been

advised surgery at the S.S.K.M. Hospital on 07.02.2017.           The reports also

indicated that the petitioner has been suffering from various common ailments.

      There is no contrary report indicating that the petitioner does not require

any surgery. Mr. Raghava Charyulu does not oppose the interim bail being

granted in view of the report of medical officer of the Correctional Home, Dum

Dum. However, he submits that the petitioner should not be enlarged on bail

without a report being submitted by C.B.I.

      We therefore, accept the report submitted by the medical officer of the

Correctional Home, Dum Dum and we are inclined to grant interim bail to the

petitioner for three months so that he may be able to avail of better medical

treatment with private hospitals if required.

       Accordingly, the Petitioner shall be enlarged on interim bail till 16th May,

2017 upon furnishing a bond of `25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs) with two

sureties for the amount of `12,50,000/- (Rupees twelve lakhs fifty thousand)

each to the satisfaction of the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipur subject

to the following conditions:

      1.

the petitioner will surrender his passport to the Trial Court;

2. he will not leave Kolkata without the permission of the Trial Court and intimation to the Investigating Officer;

2 3

3. in the event the petitioner is going to avail of medical treatment in a private hospital, he shall intimate the Investigating Officer the name of the hospital and the period for which he expects to be hospitalized;

4. the petitioner shall always co-operate with the Investigating Officer, making himself available for interrogation. Failure to abide by the aforesaid conditions will mean that the interim bail granted to the petitioner till 16th May, 2017 is liable to be cancelled, without further reference to this Court.

List this application for bail, being C.R.M. No. 9915 of 2016, on 12th May, 2017.

(Nishita Mhatre, A.C.J.) (Tapash Mookherjee J.) 3