Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Srabanti Mukhopadhyay vs Unknown on 12 October, 2023
12.10.2023 C.R.M. (A) 3788 of 2023
SL. 5
Court No. 29
Sourav
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
(Allowed) the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with
Chatterjeehat Police Station Case No. 71 of 2023 dated
27.04.2023 under Sections 420/406/467/471/120B IPC
(corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1898 of 2023).
And
In the matter of: Srabanti Mukhopadhyay
....petitioner.
Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya
Mr. Santanu Talukdar
Mr. Rajib Mullick
Ms. Sonia Mukherjee
...for the petitioner.
Mr. Saibal Bapuli, Ld. APP
Mr. Arani Bhattacharyya
...for the State.
Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee
... for the defacto complainant.
1.Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Perused the order dated 26.09.2023 passed by the co- ordinate Bench granting interim protection to the petitioner who is alleged to be the Chairman of the company.
3. The disputes between the accused and her husband in one side and the informant on the other side relates to management of affairs of the company and allegation of forgery, fabrication done by the petitioner and her husband to divest the informant from the affairs of the company including financial gain by such manouvering. Proceeding over the matter is pending before the NCLT. The petitioner having expressed her readiness and willingness to cooperate with the investigation and flight risk having been alleged by the 2 Counsel for the informant and the State, the petitioner was granted interim protection subject to deposit of her passport before the Trial Court within 48 hours.
4. Mr. Bapuli, learned Additional P.P. today submits before this Court that the petitioner has already deposited the passport in the concerned court.
5. From the materials placed by learned Counsel for the parties, we prima facie find some element of criminality in the action of the petitioner but whether that criminality constitutes any offence as alleged is a matter to be found out by the Trial Court on evidence to be adduced by the prosecution. The entire transaction as alleged against the petitioner is document based which cannot be erased or mutilated as most of the documents are in the hands of the informant now and most of the documents have also been seized by the police in the meantime.
6. As discussed supra, there is no flight risk of the petitioner. In view of the nature of evidence, vis-à-vis the allegation made against the petitioner, we do not find any justification for custodial interrogation of the petitioner.
7. Regard being had to the facts and submission, factum of permanent residence of the petitioner, nature of allegation, nature of evidence and substantial progress in investigation, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of her arrest by the Arresting Officer in the aforesaid P.S. case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including 3 the conditions that:
i) The petitioner is directed to appear before the I.O.
once in a fortnight between sunrise to sunset for the purpose of investigation till submission of Final Form.
8. Within 21 days from today, petitioners are directed to appear before the I.O. along with a server copy or certified copy of this order.
9. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
10. The application being CRM (A) 3788 of 2023 is disposed of.
11. The I.O. is hereby directed to act upon the server copy of this order, if required.
12. It is made clear that the question of flight risk of the petitioner is limited to the period of investigation only. After charge-sheet is filed, the petitioner may apply for going abroad in the matter of her company before the Trial Court and such application should be disposed of on merit in accordance with law.
(Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.) (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.) 4