Allowed

Gour Saha v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC13 Sept 2021CRM/435/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri allowed an application for anticipatory bail. The court found no clear implication of the petitioner in the death caused by consumption of poison, deeming custodial interrogation unnecessary if the petitioner cooperates. Bail was granted with a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner Gour Saha released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of like amount each.

Gour Saha Vs the State of West Bengal — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

25. 13.09.2021 Ct.32 Tanmoy Allowed

¶2

In The High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side

¶3

(Through Video Conference)

¶4

C.R.M. 435 of 2021

¶5

In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 22/03/2021 in connection with New Jalpaiguri Police Station Case No. 1330 of 2020 dated 10/11/2020 under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶6

And

¶7

In the matter of: - Gour Saha

¶8

…petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Hillol Saha Podder,

¶10

…for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Nilay Chakraborty, Ms. Namrata Das …for the State (through V.C.)

¶12

The petitioner says that he has absolutely no role to play in the death of the victim who committed suicide.

¶13

We have seen the material in the Case Diary including the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. None of the statements clearly implicate the petitioner. The petitioner is the owner of a business and was awarded a contract for collecting parking fees. It appears that there was an altercation between the manager of the said business and one of the employees. Such employee was later found dead. The cause of death appears to be consumption of poison.

¶14

¶15

On an overall consideration of the material on record and the facts and circumstances of the case and the possible extent of complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence, we are of the opinion that immediate custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary so long as he co-operates fully with the Investigating Officer.

¶16

Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner, viz ., Gour Saha shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- 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 petitioner fails 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. 435 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.)

Gour Saha v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gour Saha v. the 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

Tariful Haque @ Rubel Vs the State of West Bengal

Md. Munna Qureshi Vs State of West Bengal

Bhola Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal

Abed Ali and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Kajali Barman and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Mohini Sarkar and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal