This single bench disposed of an anticipatory bail application where the petitioner renewed a prayer rejected earlier. The Bench declined to revisit the coordinate bench's finding of specific involvement, thereby denying anticipatory bail and dismissing the application.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected and application CRM (A) 516 of 2022 dismissed.
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.
10.02.2022 05 Ct. No 29 KAUSHIK (REJECTED)
C.R.M. (A) 516 of 2022
In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Ranaghat Police Station Case No. 299 of 2021 dated 05.09.2021 under Sections 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
And
In Re : Bankim Das
….. petitioner
Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra .… for the petitioner
Mr. Prasun Kumar Dutta Mr. Subrata Roy … for the State
Petitioner renews the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, although the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected on November 25, 2021, the police subsequently filed charge-sheet and, therefore, detention of the petitioner is not required. He submits that, the other two co-accused who are the principal accused, were granted anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the contents in the case diary.
There is a categorical finding in the Coordinate Bench while rejecting the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner that specific act was attributed to the petitioner. It is only on such ground that the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected. The subsequent filing of the charge-sheet, per se , does not alter the material position in the sense that filing of the charge-sheet by itself is not a ground for grant of anticipatory bail. The Court
2
is required to take into consideration the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner amongst others while considering the prayer for anticipatory bail. Since, there subsist a finding to such effect by the Coordinate Bench passed on November 29, 2021, we deem it appropriate not to revisit such finding.
In such circumstances, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected and the application being CRM (A) 516 of 2022 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the subsequent filing of the charge-sheet.
Whether the coordinate bench's finding of specific act against the petitioner must be revisited.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bankim Das
State
Debangsu Basak
Bibhas Ranjan De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
