Allowed

Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC20 Sept 2021CRM/2330/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of attempted murder, grievous bodily harm, and arson. Finding they did not inflict injuries, bail was ordered without requiring immediate custody, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties, abiding by Section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk and Anr. Vs State of West… — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

05. 20.09.2021 Ct.32 Tanmoy Allowed

¶2

C.R.M. 2330 of 2021

¶3

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 02/03/2021 in connection with Bhagwangola Police Station Case No. 242 of 2020 dated 01/06/2020 under Sections 447/448/354/325/326/307/380/435/436/427/120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

And

¶5

In the matter of: - Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk & Anr.

¶6

…petitioners. Ms. Rabia Khatoon

¶7

…for the petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Sudip Ghosh, Ld. Sr. Govt. Adv., Mr. Bitasok Banerjee, Mr. A.K. Datta

¶9

…for the State.

¶10

The petitioners are two out of several accused persons. The allegation is primarily of attempted murder, causing grievous bodily harm and arson.

¶11

The petitioners say that they did not actively participate in the incident. They were only present as members of the group.

¶12

We have seen the statements of witnesses in the Case Diary. We have also seen the injury report. From the material on record it prima facie does not appear that the petitioners were the persons who actually inflicted the injury on the victims. We are told that charge-sheet has been submitted.

¶13

On an overall assessment of the material on record and the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the offence, we are of the view that immediate

¶14

¶15

custodial interrogation of the petitioners may not be necessary so long as they co-operate with further investigation, if any.

¶16

Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, viz. , 1. Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk , 2. Ismail Sk shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and shall abide by the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

In case the petitioners fail to adhere to any of the conditions mentioned in Section 438(2) of the Code, the learned Court below shall be entitled to cancel the anticipatory bail without further reference to this Court.

¶18

The application for anticipatory bail being C.R.M. 2330 of 2021 is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶19

All parties shall act in terms of server copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)

Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk and Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ab Halim @ Abdul Halim @ Laltu Sk and Anr. 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

Sk Abdullah and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Haridas Durlav and Another Vs State of West Bengal

MD Helaluddin Chaudhuri @ Rintu Daktar Vs State of West Bengal

Karim Vs State of West Bengal

Sima Das Vs State of West Bengal

Chandan Jana@Chiranjit Patra and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal