High Court at Calcutta rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by Manab Roy in a rape case where the alleged gravity of the offence and medical evidence discouraged granting bail.
Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; application 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.
15.02.2022 Serial no. 01 Dd
(Through Video Conference)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI
CRM(A) 76 of 2022
In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with New Jalpaiguri Police Station Case No. 992 of 2020 dated 13.08.2020 under Sections 376(D)/313/323/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Charge Sheet No. 1078 of 2020 dated 10.10.2020 under Section 376(D)/506 of the Indian Penal Code.
-And-
In the matter of : Manab Roy … …Petitioner
Mr. Debasish Mukhopadhyay, Advocate … … For the Petitioner
Mr. Aditishankar Chakraborty, ld. APP Mr. Tapan Bhattacherjee, Advocate … …For the State
Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the principal accused was granted bail by the jurisdictional Court. Other co-accused were either on bail or on anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the statements of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the medical report.
It appears from the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the victim that the petitioner ravished the victim. The medical report
2
tends to corroborate the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the victim.
Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected .
CRM(A) 76 of 2022 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a rape case involving grave offences.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Manab Roy
State
Debangsu Basak
Bibhas Ranjan De
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
