Allowed

Prasanta Das v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC8 Dec 2020CRM/9808/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to Prasanta Das under Section 438 CrPC in a cheating and forgery case, directing his release upon furnishing a bond and meeting the investigating officer weekly, noting that custodial interrogation was not required as the principal accused was already on bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and appearing once a week.

Prasanta Das Vs State of West Bengal — Cheating and Forgery | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

08.12.2020 Sl. No.40 akd [ALLOWED]

¶2

C. R. M. 9808 of 2020 [via video conferencing]

¶3

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 24.11.2020 in connection with Bidhannagar Cyber Police Station Case No. 83 of 2020 dated 09.11.2020 under Sections 170/385/419/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

And

¶5

In Re: Prasanta Das

¶6

… … Petitioner

¶7

Mr. Sourav Chatterjee .. Advocate Mr. Supratik Roy .. Advocate Mr. Sudipta Roy .. Advocate

¶8

… … for the petitioner

¶9

Mr. Bivas Chatterjee .. Advocate

¶10

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the de-facto complainant had a large sum running over nine crores due and payable to the firm of the petitioner. In retaliation, he has been falsely implicated in the instant case.

¶11

Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is the conspirator and had employed the co-accused to personate a member of the investigating wing attached to the Central Government to extort money from the de-facto complainant.

¶12

We have considered the materials on record. There are documents to show that there are earlier transactions between the parties. It is claimed that over nine crores is due and payable to the petitioner. Whether such materials would constitute motive for participation in the crime or not may be assessed at the appropriate stage of the proceeding. In view of the aforesaid facts and as the principal accused has already been arrested and is presently on regular bail, we are of the opinion progress of investigation does not require

¶13

¶14

custodial interrogation of the petitioner although he requires to cooperate with the investigation in accordance with law.

¶15

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the accused/petitioner, namely Prasanta Das , be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on further condition that the petitioner shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a week until further orders.

¶16

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

¶17

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

¶18

(Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Prasanta Das v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanta Das 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

Somnath Adhikary@Somnath Adhikari Vs State of West Bengal

Barjahan Ali @ Borjahan Ali Vs State of West Bengal

Dr Nityananda Gain 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

Babu Sk @ Saifuddin Biswas Vs State of West Bengal