The Allahabad High Court examined an application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner facing sexual and extortion charges. The court found custodial interrogation unwarranted and confirmed interim bail.
Application for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing ₹10,000 bond with two sureties.
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.
09.03.2021 Item No.121 Ct.No.28 Subha Allowed
C.R.M. 8208 of 2020
(Via Video Conference)
In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
And In the matter of : Mangal Das .. Petitioner. Mr. Koustav Bagchi Mr. Arup Sarkar ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Saibal Bapuli, ld. APP Mr. Arnani Bhattacharya ... For the State.
Apprehending arrest in connection with Chanchal Police Station Case No. 848 of 2020 dated 22-09-2020 under Sections 448/376/511 of the Indian Penal Code, the present application has been filed.
Mr. Bagchi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the basis of an order passed in an application under Section 156(3) of the Code. F.I.R was registered wherein it was, inter alia, alleged that for five years the
2
petitioner was offering bad proposal upon the complainant. However, no complaint to that effect has ever lodged.
In the said conspectus, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted.
Mr. Bapuli, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for anticipatory of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was granted interim bail by an order dated 20th October, 2020 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this court.
Having heard the learned advocates and considering the materials available in the case diary, the nature of allegations and the extent of complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence, we are of the opinion that the custodial detention of the petitioner is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and the interim bail granted on 20th October, 2020 is confirmed.
Accordingly, we allow the application for anticipatory bail and direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, namely, Mangal Das shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM 8208 of 2020 is, thus, disposed of.
3
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail应予 granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in connection with offences under Sections 448, 376, and 511 IPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mangal Das
State
Tirthankar Ghosh
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
