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

[Cites 8, 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.) 75 09.02.2015 sm CRM No. 16131 of 2014 In the matter of an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 17.11.2014 in connection with Hogalberia P.S.Case No.106 of 2014 dated 18.05.2014 under Sections 448/354(2)/313/ 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In Re : Arman Malitha & Ors. .. for the petitioners.

Mr.Amanul Islam ... for the Petitioners.

Mr.Asit Nayek ... for the State.

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

The petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Hogalberia P.S.Case No.106 of 2014 dated 18.05.2014 under Sections 448/354(2)/313/ 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code, have approached this Court for anticipatory bail.

We have gone through the case diary, more particularly to the injury report at page 33 and the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 CrPC, which is at page 48.

Having regard to the above and considering the extent of involvement, while allowing the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner nos.2 and 3 and the same in case of the petitioner no.1 stands rejected.

Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the petitioner nos.2 and 3 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. If not the petitioners are arrested since the charge sheet has been submitted after expiry of two weeks, the petitioner nos.2 and 3 shall on their own surrender before the concerned court.

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.) 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)