The Court dismissed the application for anticipatory bail filed by Rasid Mondal and another. The petition appeared multiple times without representation, leading to a default dismissal of the application.
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.
07.07.2021 Court No.30 Item No.16 Krishnendu Dismissed
CRM 2859 of 2020 (Via video Conference)
In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Swarupnagar Police Station Case No. 255 of 2019 dated 18.04.2019 under sections 498A/306/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/ 4 of the D.P. Act.
And
In Re: Rasid Mondal @ Abdul Rasid Mondal & Anr.
Petitioners
Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, ld. P.P. Mr. Madhusudan Sur Mr. Dipankar Paramanick
Records reveal that no one appeared on behalf of the petitioners
when the matter was taken up for hearing on 18th March, 2020 and again on 16th December, 2020.
Today also no one appears on behalf of the petitioners and no accommodation has been sought for though Mr. Mukherjee, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, is present.
In view thereof, the application for anticipatory bail, being CRM 2859 of 2020, is dismissed for default.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for anticipatory bail stands disposed due to non-appearance of petitioners.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rasid Mondal @ Abdul Rasid Mondal & Anr.
State
Suvra Ghosh
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
