The anticipatory bail application was dismissed for default due to the absence of counsel representing the petitioners in the hearing.
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.
09.02.2022 Serial no.4 Aloke Ct. No. 29
CRM (A) 295 of 2022
In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
-And-
In the matter of : Manjur Hossain & Anr.
… …Petitioners
Mr. Sanjay Bardhan, Advocate
Mr. Santanu Chatterjee, Advocate
… …For the State
None appears for the petitioners. None appeared for
the petitioners on the previous occasion also.
State is represented.
In such circumstances, CRM (A) 295 of 2022 is
dismissed for default.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
Manjur Hossain & Anr.
The State
Debangsu Basak
Bibhas Ranjan De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
