Dismissed

Kartick Dutta v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC15 Mar 2021CRM/47/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC. Despite the applicant's claim of a road accident and inconsistencies in the FIR, the court found prima facie evidence of involvement and denied bail due to the gravity of the murder charges. Prior directions to medical officials to verify the cause of death were noted but did not alter the outcome.

What did the court decide?

Bail application CRM 47 of 2021 dismissed; request for LCD case diary retention denied.

Kartick Dutta Vs State of West Bengal — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

15.03.2021 Item No.04 Ct.No.28 Subha rejected

¶2

C.R.M. 47 of 2021

¶3

(Via Video Conference)

¶4

In Re : An Application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶5

In the matter of : Kartik Dutta ... Petitioner. Mr. Navanil De Mr. Rajeshwar Chakraborty ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Saibal Bapuli, APP Mr. Arani Bhyattacharyya ... For the State.

¶6

The present application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner in connection with Chanditala P.S. Case No. 269 of 2019 dated June 25, 2019 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (G. R. Case No. 1037 of 2019).

¶7

Mr. De, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. There are inconsistencies in the contents of the complaint lodged and the statement of the witness, as recorded under Section 164 of the Code.

¶8

¶9

He further submits that the deceased was the victim of, not a murder but, an incident in the nature of a Road Traffic Accident ( RTA ).

¶10

Upon completion of investigation, charge sheet has also been submitted and as such, further detention of the petitioner, who is in custody since 26^th June, 2019, is not warranted in the facts and circumstances.

¶11

Records reveal that by an earlier order dated 6^th January, 2021, this court directed the Investigating Officer to obtain written confirmation from the Deputy Superintendent, Medical College and Hospital on the alleged authenticity of the claim of the petitioner with regard to death of the victim in the RTA. Subsequent thereto, by an order dated 8^th March, 2021, we directed the Investigating Officer to record the statements of Dr. Jayanta Sanyal, Deputy Superintendent, Medical College and Hospital and one Dr. Sisir Kumar Jana, Medical Officer, who had prepared the report.

¶12

Pursuant to such direction, statements as recorded under Section 161 of the Code have been placed before this court. Let the report of the Investigating Officer as filed through the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record.

¶13

Dr. Sisir Kumar Jana, Medical Officer, Medical College and Hospital in his statement has recorded that the word ‘RTA’ was erroneously incorporated.

¶14

¶15

We have perused the materials in the case diary including the statement of the eye-witness, as recorded under Section 161 of the Code.

¶16

Prima facie , the materials in the case diary reveal the involvement of the present petitioner in the alleged offence. Considering the gravity of the offence and the extent of complicity of the present petitioner in the alleged offence, we are not inclined to exercise any discretion in favour of the petitioner and as such, his prayer for bail is refused at this stage.

¶17

Accordingly, the application for bail being CRM 47 of 2021 is dismissed.

¶18

The personal appearance of the Investigating Officer is dispensed with.

¶19

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

¶21

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Kartick Dutta v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kartick Dutta 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

Jagannath Pramanik and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Somnath Roy Vs State of West Bengal

Babu Chandra Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal

Alamin Mallick Vs State of West Bengal

Ramji Mondal Vs State of West Bengal

Sk Nasim @Pappu and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal