Allowed

Debasish@Debasis Bhowmik and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC2 Mar 2022CRM(A)/56/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Calcutta High Court at Jalpaiguri allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. Finding a disparity in the complainant's statement and missing ingredients for rape, the court held custodial interrogation unnecessary and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; petitioners released on bail upon furnishing bond and meeting Investigating Officer fortnightly.

Debasish@Debasis Bhowmik and Ors. Vs the State of West… — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

02.03.2022

¶2

COURT : 01 ITEM : 29 MATTER : 438 STATUS : ALLOWED TRANSCRIBER : Saswata

¶3

CIRCUIT BENCH OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT AT JALPAIGURI

¶4

CRM (A) 56 of 2022

¶5

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Malbazar Police Station Case No. 764 of 2021 dated 27.12.2021 under Sections 341/323/376/511/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶6

And

¶7

In the matter of : Debasis @ Debasish Bhowmick & Ors.

¶8

...Petitioners

¶9

Mr. Ritam Chowdhury Mr.Debajit Kundu Mr. Kallol Acharjee Mr. Sagnik Sankar Sikdar

¶10

...for the Petitioners

¶11

...for the State

¶12

Apprehending arrest, the petitioners have filed the instant application for anticipatory bail in connection with Malbazar Police Station Case No. 764 of 2021 under Sections 341/323/376/511/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated with the aforementioned case. It is submitted that the petitioners and the de facto complainant were working in a pharmaceutical company and the moment the interrogation was made against the petitioner pertaining to the defalcation of funds, she immediately resigned and took away the account register. To shed her misdeeds, the present case has been filed against the petitioners.

¶14

Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and relies upon the complaint by the de facto complainant and her statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶15

After perusing the complaint as well as the statement of the victim lady, prima facie, we find disparity in her stand and ingredients pertaining to Section 376 of the India Penal Code is conspicuously absent. We, thus, find that there is no need for custodial interrogation of the petitioners.

¶16

As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed .

¶17

Accordingly, in the event of arrest the petitioners namely Debasis @ Debasish Bhowmick, Santanu Chowdhury, Samantak

¶18

Ray Chowdhury & Debasish Chakraborty shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on further condition as enshrined under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and on further condition that the petitioners shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight.

¶19

The application being CRM (A) 56 of 2022 is accordingly disposed of.

¶20

(Harish Tandon, J)

¶21

(Rabindranath Samanta, J)

Debasish@Debasis Bhowmik and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Debasish@Debasis Bhowmik and Ors. v. the 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

Sudeb Sarkar and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal

Ananda Debnath Vs the State of West Bengal

Tapash Barman Vs the State of West Bengal

Chanchal Roy @ Mithu Roy Vs the State of West Bengal

Asidul Sekh Vs the State of West Bengal

Ekrajul Miya and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal