Dismissed

Abhishek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC15 Dec 2020CRM/10006/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered an application to relax bail conditions restricting the petitioner from entering the Jhargram Police Station jurisdiction and requiring weekly reporting. The Court dismissed the application due to lack of post-deprivation medical documents and the victim not being examined.

What did the court decide?

The application for relaxation of bail conditions (CRAN 1 of 2021) was dismissed.

Abhishek Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

20.07.2021 Item no.41 Court No.30 Avijit Mitra

¶2

C.R.M. 10006 of 2020 (through video conference)

¶3

with IA No. CRAN 1 of 2021

¶4

In Re:- An application for relaxation;

¶5

And

¶6

In Re : Abhishek Sarkar

¶7

…. Petitioner

¶8

Mr. Rajdeep Majumder, Mr. Pritam Ray

¶9

….for the petitioner Mr. Goutam Wilson, Mr. N.P. Agarwala

¶10

…for the State

¶11

The present application has been preferred inter alia praying for relaxation of conditions of bail as incorporated in the order dated 15^th December, 2020 passed in CRM 10006 of 2020.

¶12

Mr. Majumder, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has complied with all the conditions as incorporated in the order dated 15^th December, 2020 till date.

¶13

He submits that the petitioner’s mother is suffering from cancer and due to the conditions as imposed, the petitioner is not being able to enter the jurisdiction of Jhargram Police Station and to attend his work on regular basis.

¶14

In view thereof, he submits that the conditions to the effect that ‘ he shall not enter the jurisdiction of Jhargram Police Station’ and that ‘he shall report to the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station within whose jurisdiction he shall reside once in a week until

¶15

¶16

further orders ’, be waived, more so when upon completion of investigation chargesheet has already been submitted.

¶17

Mr. Wilson, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State opposes the petitioner’s prayer.

¶18

The medical documents as annexed to the present application are pertaining to the period prior to the issuance of the order dated 15^th December, 2020 passed in CRM 10006 of 2020. The victim girl has also not been examined as yet.

¶19

In view thereof, we are not inclined to waive the conditions of bail, as prayed for.

¶20

Accordingly, the application being CRAN 1 of 2021 is dismissed.

¶21

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶22

(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Abhishek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shankar Das and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Miraj Ali@Meraj Vs State of West Bengal

Saidul@Saidulhoque Vs State of West Bengal

Mrityunjoy Routh and Another Vs State of West Bengal

Monojit Das Vs State of West Bengal

Jharu Mondal Vs State of West Bengal