Allowed

Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC8 Dec 2020CRM/9910/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners accused of offences under sections 366, 325, 506, and 376 IPC. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary as the victim had already been recovered.

What did the court decide?

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

Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk Vs State of West… — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2020)

¶1

08.12.2020 Sl. No.45 akd [ALLOWED]

¶2

C. R. M. 9910 of 2020 [via video conferencing]

¶3

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 26.11.2020 in connection with Pandua Police Station Case No. 161 of 2020 dated 06.07.2020 under Sections 366/325/506/34/376 of the Indian Penal Code. (G.R. Case No.864 of 2020)

¶4

And

¶5

In Re: Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk. & Anr.

¶6

… … Petitioners

¶7

Mr. Tapodip Gupta .. Advocate

¶8

… … for the petitioners

¶9

Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee .. Ld. Public Prosecutor Mr. Aniket Mitra .. Advocate

¶10

… … for the State

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there was a love affair between the parties and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case.

¶12

Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that victim was abducted and forcibly raped.

¶13

We have considered the materials on record including the statement of the victim girl recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. We note that the victim had been married to the petitioner at the behest of one of her relations. Whether such act was forcible or not may be assessed at the appropriate stage of the proceeding. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case and as the victim girl has already been recovered, we are of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioners is not necessary and they may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶14

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the accused/petitioners, namely (1) Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk. & (2) Najir @ Najer Ali Sekh @ Nafir Ali Sk. , be released on bail

¶15

¶16

upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each, 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.

¶17

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

¶18

(Suvra Ghosh, J.)

¶19

(Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jafar @ Jafor Ali Sekh @ Jafar Ali Sk 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

Prasanta Das Vs State of West Bengal

Dr MD Mehdi Hasan Vs State of West Bengal

Babu Sk @ Saifuddin Biswas Vs State of West Bengal