Nemai Roy & Ors vs Unknown on 9 November, 2011

[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Nemai Roy & Ors vs Unknown on 9 November, 2011

09.11.2011 CRM No. 9329 of 2011 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 20th September, 2011 in connection with Arambag P.S. Case No. 89 dated 14.04.2010 under Sections 147/148/149/506/302/120B of the IPC, Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and Section 9(b)(ii) of the Indian Explosives Act.

                                    And
             In the matter of:- Nemai Roy & Ors.       petitioners

             Mr. Asimesh Goswami,
             Ms. Joyita Roy                             for the petitioners

             Mrs. Sujata Das                            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 147/148/149/506/302/120B of the I.P.C., Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act and Section 9(b)(ii) of the Indian Explosives Act, which has been registered vide Arambagh P.S. Case No. 89 dated 14.04.2010.

It is contended that the petitioners are in custody for about 135 days. Charge sheet has been submitted but the case has not been committed for trial. It is further submitted that four co-accused persons standing on the same footing are on bail.

On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the State produced the case papers and opposed the prayer for bail.

We have gone through the case papers.

Having regard to the nature of allegation as against the petitioner no. 1 which prima facie shows that he led the mob which killed the victim, a political opponent, we are not inclined to consider his prayer for bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner no. 1 is rejected.

So far as the other accused persons are concerned, as there is no specific role has been attributed to them, in our opinion, their prayer for bail may be considered favourably. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner nos. 2 to 9 stands allowed.

Let the petitioner nos. 2 to 9 be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arambagh upon furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with one local surety of the like amount each and on condition that they shall not enter within the jurisdiction of Arambagh Sub-Division until further order. They shall not tamper with the prosecution case or commit any offence while on bail.

The bail application is, thus, disposed of.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.) (Asim Kumar Ray, J.)

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)