Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Bail Under Section ... vs In Re: Akhtar Sk. @ Saddam Sk on 14 March, 2013
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
1 C. R. M. 3719 of 2013
14. 03.2013 Sl.58 b.r.
In the matter of an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed 13.03.2013 in connection with Bowbazar P.S. Case 143 of 2012 dated 20.03.2012 under Sections 489B/489C/120B of the Indian Penal Code.
and In Re: Akhtar Sk. @ Saddam Sk.. .... Petitioner(In jail). Mr. Supriya Raychowdhury, Mr. Syed Nasim Aejaz, ....... For the petitioner.
Mr. Atib Ahamed Siddiqui ...... for the State.
Heard the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case diary.
The petitioiner is seeking bail in connection with a case relating to the offences punishable under Sections 489B/489C/120C of the Indian Penal Code, which was registered vide Bowbazar P.S. Case No. 143 of 2012.
It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody for 358 days. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been submitted. 2 Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and contended that this is a case where from the joint possession of the five accused total 200 pieces of counterfeit Indian Currency Notes each of denomination of Rs.1000/- and 1400 pieces of similar counterfeit currency notes each of denomination of Rs.500/- were recovered from the exclusive possession of the present petitioner while the same were being trafficked.
Then he draws our attention to the seizure list and other materials collected during investigation.
Now having regard to the nature and serious of the allegations and materials collected in support of the same as against the present petitioner more particularly the number of fake currency notes recovered from him and his associates, it prima facie appears to us that petitioner is dealing in counterfeit note and having regard to the further facts that this kind of offences are at rise in our State and the same not only poses a serious threat to the stability of our country's economy but it is also a threat to the national safety and security, accordingly this application is rejected.
Last but not least that the learned counsel for the petitioner complained about the delay in trial but going through the record we find that delay is completely attributable to the defence who are taking time one after another on the pretext to engaging lawyer. 3
We make it clear that if no lawyer is engaged by the accused to defend them in the trial and then if any prayer is made on their behalf for engaging a lawyer for their defence at the cost of the State, the trial Court at once shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent certified copy of this order to the learned Counsel for the petitioner upon compliance of necessary formalities.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) ( Subal Baidya, J.)