An Application For Anticipatory Bail ... vs In Re : Raju Kumar on 9 February, 2015

[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

An Application For Anticipatory Bail ... vs In Re : Raju Kumar on 9 February, 2015

Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy

sm CRM No. 16055 of 2014 In the matter of an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 14.11.2014 in connection with Coke Oven P.S.Case No.136 of 2014 dated 14.10.2014 under Section 407 of the Indian Penal Code.


                                      And

             In Re : Raju Kumar               ... Petitioner.

                    Mr.Tirthankar Dhali            ... for the Petitioner.

                    Mr.Syed Arif Ahmed       ... for the State



                    The   concerned       police   officer,    who    was   entrusted   with   the

investigation initially, is present in court. He informed us that already he has retired from service.

The police officer, who has been entrusted with the investigation of the case, has duly been informed about this case, but still he has not turned up.

We direct the present Investigating Officer of the case be personally present in court tomorrow at 10.30 AM. This order be communicated to the Commissioner, Durgapur Copmmissionerate.

Supplementary Affidavit filed in court be taken on record. It be noted that a copy has also been served upon the learned advocate for the State.

The matter stands adjourned for this day.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Ishan Chandra Das, J.) 68 09.02.2015 sm CRM No. 16113 of 2014 In the matter of an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 14.11.2014 in connection with Dhupguri P.S.Case No.443 of 2014 dated 10.10.2014 under Sections 448/376/511/ 323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In Re : Kartick Roy & Anr. .. for the petitioners.

Mr.Anirban Banerjee ... for the Petitioners.

Mr.Goutam Wilson ... for the State.

Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the parties and considered their respective submissions. Perused the case diary.

The petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Dhupguri P.S.Case No.443 of 2014 dated 10.10.2014 under Sections 448/376/511/323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, have approached this Court for anticipatory bail.

This is a case where the FIR has been lodged four (4) months after the alleged incident.

We have gone through the injuries, which are at pages 3 and 17 of the case diary and except mentioning physical assault, there is nothing.

Now, considering the injury reports and other materials collected during investigation, in our opinion, the petitioners' prayer for anticipatory bail can be considered favourably. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail stands allowed.

Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioners in connection with the aforesaid case, they shall at once be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting officer concerned upon furnishing a Bond of Rs.5000/- each on condition that after release, they shall surrender before the concerned court within two weeks thereafter.

This order is subject to the conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Ishan Chandra Das, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)