The applicant sought anticipatory bail for an FIR under sections 308/304 IPC. The State submitted that petitioners were not charged. The court held the application infructuous and disposed of it without a further order.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed as infructuous.
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.
04.03.2021 Item No.10 Ct.No.28 dc.
C.R.M. 8175 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 Domjur P.S. Case No. 504 of 2020 dated 01.10.2020 under Sections 308/304 of the Indian Penal Code.
And
In Re : Prabhat Karmakar & Anr.
... Petitioners.
Mr. Subrato Roy
... For the State.
Report has been submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State. Let the said report be kept on record.
The report reflects that in connection with Domjur P.S. Case No. 504 of 2020 dated 01.10.2020 under Sections 308/304 of the Indian Penal Code, charge-sheet has already been submitted and the petitioners’ name are not in the charge-sheet. As such, petitioners are not wanted in the instant case. The application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as such, is infructuous.
In view thereof, no further order need be passed in the present application and the same is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable when the names of the petitioners do not figure in the charge-sheet.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Prabhat Karmakar & Anr.
The State
Tirthankar Ghosh
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
