Allowed

Emajuddin Sk. v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC9 Dec 2020CRM/9565/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to a petitioner arrested during a hotel raid related to immoral trafficking and child sexual offences. Considering the petitioner was a mere customer, victim statements did not implicate him as a procurer, and he had suffered 163 days of detention, bail was allowed on a bond with sureties, subject to appearance and non-intimidation conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount each, one local, subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference with witnesses.

Emajuddin Sk. Vs the State of West Bengal — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

09.12.2020 4 b.das

¶2

CRM 9565 of 2020

¶3

(Via Video Conference)

¶4

In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Berhampore P.S. Case No.620 of 2020 dated 29.06.2020 under Sections 376/370/372/373/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4/5/7 of ITPA and Sections 4/8/12/17 of the POCSO Act and Section 75 of the J.J. Act.

¶5

And

¶6

In the matter of: Emajuddin Sk.

¶7

….Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Rajdeep Mazumder Mr. M. Mukherjee Mr. A. Rahaman

¶9

…for the Petitioner.

¶10

Ms. Z.N. Khan Mr. M.F.A. Begg …for the State.

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is a customer and had been arrested in course of a raid in a hotel where immoral trafficking of women was carried on. He is in custody for 163 days. Investigation is complete.

¶12

Learned lawyer for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that co-accuseds stated that petitioner was involved in procuring girls.

¶13

We have considered the materials on record. Statement of victim girls do not implicate the petitioner as their procurer. Keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioner in the light of the submission that he was a mere customer and the period of detention suffered by him, we are of the opinion that petitioner may be granted bail.

¶14

¶15

Accordingly we direct that the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Berhampore, Murshidabad subject to condition that the petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

In the event the petitioner fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.

¶17

The application for bail is, accordingly, allowed.

¶18

( Suvra Ghosh, J. ) ( Joymalya Bagchi, J. )

Emajuddin Sk. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Emajuddin Sk. v. the 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

Prasanta Das Vs State of West Bengal

Dr MD Mehdi Hasan Vs State of West Bengal

Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk Vs State of West Bengal

Biswajit Mandal Vs State of West Bengal

Anju Sutradhar Vs State of West Bengal

Afsana Khatun Vs State of West Bengal