The High Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. linked to an FIR alleging theft and cheating. The bench found allegations too serious to warrant bail discretion and dismissed the application.
Anticipatory bail is rejected and the application is 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.
26.07.2023
C.R.M. (A) 2474 of 2023
Sl. 3 Court No. 29 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Suvayan the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with (Rejected) Barrackpore Women Police Station Case No. 15 of 2023 dated 23.03.2023 under Sections 323/325/376(2)(n)/406/506 of the IPC, 1860. And In the matter of: Parimal Mistri @ Raju Mistry ….petitioner. Mr. Sayan De Mr. Sayan Kanjilal Mr. Koustav Shome …for the petitioner. Mr. Neguive Ahmed, APP Ms. Ayantika Roy …for the State. 1. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties. 2. Considered the materials placed by learned Counsel for the parties including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. 3. Regard being had to the seriousness of allegation, we are not inclined to exercise our discretion in favour of the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 5. Accordingly, the prayer for the anticipatory bail is rejected. 6. The application being CRM (A) 2474 of 2023 is dismissed. (Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.) (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the discretion to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be exercised given the seriousness of the allegations.
Whether the application for anticipatory bail should be allowed or rejected.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Parimal Mistri @ Raju Mistry
The State
Chitta Ranjan Dash
Partha Sarathi Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
