Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Bail Under Section ... vs In Re: Anish Bhajan @ Banti on 25 April, 2013
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
1 25-04-13
AD C.R.M. No. 6032 of 2013 In the matter of an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 24th April, 2013 in connection with Serampore P.S. Case No. 24 of 2013 dated 19-01-2013 under Sections 489B/489C/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.
And
In re: Anish Bhajan @ Banti. ... Petitioner
Mr. Subir Ganguly,
Mr. Sumanta Ganguly. ... for the petitioner
Mr. Arnab Chatterjee. ... for the State.
Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case diary.
The petitioner is seeking bail in connection with a case relating to the offences punishable under Sections 489B/489C/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act which was registered vide Serampore P.S. Case No. 24 of 2013.
This is a case where the petitioner is in custody for 85 days. He was arrested having found in his possession 13 pieces of fake Indian currency notes, each of denomination of Rs. 100/-, and one improvised country- made 6 chamber revolver with live ammunitions while those fake notes were being trafficked.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that no charge sheet has been submitted for the offence punishable under the Arms Act and this was a case of recovery from his possession only.
In response, learned Counsel for the State submitted that it is true that no charge sheet has been submitted under the Arms Act but the supplementary charge sheet will be submitted very soon after obtaining necessary sanction from the appropriate authority. He then submitted that acting on a source information, the petitioner and others were waiting in a particular place for trafficking fake Indian currency notes, police chased them while one Samir was arrested, this petitioner managed to escape and subsequently, he was arrested and the aforesaid fake notes were recovered from his possession which 2 admittedly possessed by him for the purpose of trafficking. It is further submitted that against this petitioner nine criminal cases are pending while on bail in those cases, he committed this crime.
Having regard to the nature and seriousness of the allegations and the gravity of the offence, we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting bail and the same is rejected. We are of the further opinion that in this case, the trial must be expedited.
Therefore, we direct the learned Magistrate to commit the case to the Court of Sessions for trial.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Serampore, Hooghly as well as to the Sessions Judge, Hooghly, for taking necessary steps in this regard.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Subal Baidya, J.)