Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Section 326A Of The Indian Penal Code vs In Re : Maniklal Sautya on 24 March, 2022

Author: Debangsu Basak

Bench: Debangsu Basak

24.03.2022 24 Ct. No 29 KAUSHIK (REJECTED) C.R.M. (A) 1375 of 2022 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Sutahata Police Station Case No. 194 of 2021 dated 22.06.2021 under Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

And In Re : Maniklal Sautya.

..... petitioner Mr. Suman De .... for the petitioner Mr. Narayan Prasad Agarwala Mr. Saryati Dutta ... for the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was not named in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). He submits that, the person who was named by the victim was granted statutory bail by the Jurisdictional Court.

Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that, the petitioner is one of the persons involved in the incident as will appear from the 161 Cr.P.C. statement.

The involvement of the petitioner in the incident cannot be discounted at this stage. The investigations are yet to be concluded. The offence is heinous in nature.

Considering the gravity of the offence, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2 Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected and the application being CRM (A) 1375 of 2022 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)