The Criminal Bait Bench dismissed the petitioner's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC, holding it infructuous because the petitioner had already been arrested. The State counsel relied on the arrest to support the dismissal.
Application for anticipatory bail (CRM 1454 of 2020) dismissed as infructuous due to petitioner's arrest.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
06.07.2021 tkm/ct 30 sl no. 2
CRM 1454 of 2020 (via video conference)
In Re : An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Mahishadal P.S case no 303 of 2019 dated 31.8.2020 under sections 341/323/324/325/326/3707/379/34 of the IPC And In Re : Prasenjit Pramanik …… petitioner
Mr. Prasun Dutta Mr. Subrato Roy
..... for the State
No one appears for the petitioner. Mr. Roy, learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has already been arrested and as such the present application has become infructuous.
Let the document, as produced, be kept on record. In view thereof, the application being CRM 1454 of 2020 is dismissed.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an anticipatory bail application is maintainable when the petitioner is already in custody.
Whether the State submission that the petitioner is arrested renders the application infructuous.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Prasenjit Pramanik
State
Suvra Ghosh
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
