Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Bail Under Section ... vs In Re: Sasanka Mondal @ Sasanka Sekhar ... on 1 February, 2012
Author: Ashim Kumar Roy
Bench: Ashim Kumar Roy
-02-12 C.R.M. No. 1074 of 2012 In the matter of an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 17th January, 2011 in connection with Nandigram P.S. Case No. 352 of 2007 dated 23-11-2007 under Sections 147/148/149/324/325/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.
And In re: Sasanka Mondal @ Sasanka Sekhar Mondal & Anr.
... Petitioners.
Mr. Sabir Ahmed,
Mr. Dipankar Aditya. ... for the petitioners.
Mr. Rajdeep Majumder. ... for the State.
Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Perused the case papers.
The petitioners are seeking bail in connection with a case relating to the offence punishable under Sections 147/148/149/324/325/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act which has been registered vide Nandigram P.S. Case No. 352 of 2007.
It is submitted that the present petitioners are in custody for 80 days and charge-sheet has already been submitted. It is further submitted that although the petitioners have not named in the FIR, but still they have been implicated in this case falsely at the behest of some motivated persons out of political rivalry. He further submitted that few of the accused persons are on bail.
On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and disputed the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that charge-sheet has been submitted. He submitted that although the occurrence took place about five years back, but the petitioners came to be arrested on 13-11-2011. He has drawn our attention to the statements of the witnesses at pages 91, 92, 94, 164, 167 and 169 of the case diary.
We have gone through the same and found that a group of people consisting about 400 to 500 miscreants attacked a peace-march and started firing on them. But from perusal of such statements of the witnesses except the fact that the petitioners were in the melee, we do not find any criminal overact has been attributed to them.
Now, considering the above facts and the petitioners' period of detention, we think that the petitioners' prayer for bail may be considered favourably but on stringent condition.
2Let the petitioners be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldia, Purba Midnapore, upon furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 10,000/- each, with one surety of the like amount each, which must be local and on condition that after their release, they shall not enter within the jurisdiction of the District Purba Medipore except for attending the court proceeding and they furnish their address to the Officer-in-Charge of the Nandigram P.S. and shall meet the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station where they shall reside thrice in every week until further order and they shall not tamper with the prosecution case or commit any offence while on bail.
The application for bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Asim Kumar Ray, J.)