Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
CRM-6405-2017 on 17 August, 2017
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
1 679 17.08.2017
C.R.M. 6405 of 2017 CL PG Court No.3 Re : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 05.07.2017. In re : 1. Sk. Kutub
2. Sk. Naim
3. Sk. Tapan
4. Sk. Abdul
5. Sk. Mafikul
6. Rajkumar Malick
7. Munshi Altaf
8. Bishambhar Mitra
9. Saheb Singh
10.Khokon Singh
11. Badsha Midya @ Badsha Singh
12. Sk. Haider Ali
13. Sk. Jahid
14. Sk. Harun
15. Sk. Yanush
16. Bablu Maitra
17. Binoy Pal
18. Jhantu Sk.
19. Nabab Ali Khan
20. Abdul Aziz Khan @ Laltu Khan
21. Santu Khan
22. Nurul Huda Khan
23. Mafiq Khan
24. Rafiq Khan
25. Jalal Khan
26. Dulal Khan
27. Rashid Khan
28. Zahir Khan
29. Goutam Mallick ............petitioners Mr. Siddhartha Sarkar ...........for the petitioners Mr. Arijit Ganguly Mr. Sanjib Kr. Dan...............for the State Apprehending arrest in course of investigation of Arambag Police Station F.I.R. No. 397 of 2017 dated 10.04.2017 under sections 147/148/149/447/448/427/379/354/506 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and sections 3/4/9(b) of the Explosive Substances Act, the petitioners have applied for anticipatory bail.
At the outset, Mr. Ganguly, learned advocate representing the State 2 submits that the petitioner no. 22 has since been arrested.
In that view of the matter, the application for anticipatory bail at the instance of the petitioner no. 22 stands dismissed as infructuous.
Having heard learned advocates for the parties and on perusal of the materials in the case diary and in view of the level of complicity of the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29, we are of the considered opinion that their custodial interrogation is necessary for taking the investigation to its logical conclusion;
hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 stands rejected.
The application is, thus, disposed of.
(DIPANKAR DATTA, J.) (DEBI PROSAD DEY, J.)