Allowed

Swapan Debnath @ Chotka v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC10 Sept 2020CRM/5480/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge criminal reference application granted bail to the petitioner accused under Sections 302, 120B, and 34 IPC. The court noted the prima facie case based on review of witness statements without delving into substantive merits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties, one local, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence and meeting OIC every alternate date.

Swapan Debnath @ Chotka Vs State of West Bengal — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

10.09.2020 Item no. 2 Ct.11 CHC

¶2

Allowed

¶3

C.R.M. No.5480 of 2020 [C.R.A.N.1 of 2020 (Old No. CRAN 3806 of 2020] (Via Video Conference)

¶4

In Re:- An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Kalyani Police Station Case No. 164 of 2019 dated 03.04.2019 under Sections 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶5

And

¶6

In the matter of:-

¶7

Swapan Debnath @ Chotka … Petitioner Mr. Soubhik Mitter, Mr. Kshitimohan Karmakar .. for the petitioner

¶8

Mr. Pradipta Ganguly, Mr. Sudip Ghosh, Mr. Apurba Datta

¶9

..for the State

¶10

Learned advocate for the petitioner Mr. Mitter submits that the petitioner is in custody for a considerable period of time and he has been mala fide by implicated in the case at the instance of the police authorities without foundation either in fact or in law. He further adds that earlier report was called for and so far the cases which have been referred to the main case relates to NDPS Act where the petitioner has already been acquitted. According to

¶11

¶12

Mr. Mitter, the present petitioner has been implicated in this case after he has been acquitted in the NDPS case.

¶13

Mr. Ganguly, learned advocate appearing for the State submits a report and refers to the cases. He also draws the attention to the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C of the different witnesses.

¶14

We have perused the contents of such statements without entering into the merits of the contents of the statements and the time period after which it was recorded, we find that prima facie the petitioner has made out a case for release on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed.

¶15

Accordingly, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Learned A.C.J.M, Kalyani and on condition that he shall not tamper with evidence and/or intimidate the witnesses.

¶16

It is further directed that the petitioner shall meet with the Officer-in-Charge of Kalyani Police Station every alternate date until further orders, and in case the petitioner is not available before the learned trial court without any justifiable cause the learned trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail without any further reference to this Court.

¶17

With these observations, CRM 5480 of 2020 and CRAN 1 of 2020 (Old CRAN No.3806 of 2020) are disposed of.

¶18

¶19

Learned appropriate Trial Court as well as all concerned authorities shall act in terms of the copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

(Samapti Chatterjee, J.)

¶21

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Swapan Debnath @ Chotka v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapan Debnath @ Chotka 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Paramita Karmakar @ Paromita Ghosh Karmakar Vs State of West Bengal

Swapan Routh Vs State of West Bengal

Rashida Brgam Vs the State of West Bengal

Niraj Goel Vs State of West Bengal

Abdul Ansari@Abdullah Ansari Vs State of West Bengal

Haripada Ghosh @ Bhudeb Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal