Court dismissed bail application of female accused under Section 364A IPC. Found strong incriminating materials and grave offence precluding bail at this stage while directing trial court to expedite proceedings.
Bail prayer refused at this stage. Application for bail dismissed. Trial expedited.
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.
09.03.2022
Court No.32 rpan /126
CRM 8162 of 2021
In Re:- An application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Tehatta Police Station Case no.139 of 2021 dated 24.03.2021 under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code and adding Sections 302/120B/212/34 of the Indian Penal Code;
And
In Re : Jharna Halder @ Jhara Halder
Mr. Arindam Jana, Mr. Asraf Mandal … for the petitioner. Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Mr. Dipankar Paramanick
… for the State.
Mr. Jana, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the entire case is based upon circumstantial evidence and the petitioner has been falsely implicated. She is a female family member and there is no possibility that she would flee from justice or delay the trial by abscondence. She is languishing in custody for more than eleven months. The case has been committed but there is no possibility towards conclusion of the trial in the near future, since there are about 38 witnesses. Upon completion of investigation charge sheet has also been submitted and as such, further detention of the petitioner, who is languishing in custody for more than eleven months, may not be necessary and she may be enlarged on bail on any stringent condition.
Mr. Sur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State, however, opposes the petitioner’s prayer and draws
2
our attention to the statements of the witnesses, the seizure lists and the post-mortem report. He submits that the petitioner has been identified in the T.I. parade by two independent witnesses.
Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials in the case diary.
Prima facie , there are strong incriminating materials on record against the petitioner. Considering the gravity of the offence, its ramifications and the extent of her complicity in the alleged offence, we are not inclined to exercise any discretion in her favour. As such, her prayer for bail is refused at this stage.
The application for bail, being CRM 8162 of 2021 is, thus, dismissed.
However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Sugato Majumdar, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to enlarge the petitioner on bail in a charge under Section 364A IPC involving inexperienced female accused.
Whether the gravity of the offence and strong incriminating materials negate the exercise of discretion in her favour.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Jharna Halder @ Jhara Halder
State
Sugato Majumdar
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
