Allowed

Samir Biswas v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC10 Aug 2023CRM (A)/2985/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC. Balancing the pending land dispute proceedings, inconsistencies between victim statements regarding rape versus molestation, and the nature of allegations, the Court granted bail with conditions ensuring the petitioner appears for investigation weekly and does not interfere with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail if arrested, directed to appear before IO once a week and not threaten or induce any witness.

Samir Biswas Vs State of West Bengal — Anticipatory Bail | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

10.08.2023 (M/L 196) Ct. No.29 Allowed (SKB)

¶2

CRM (A) 2985 of 2023 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Tehatta P.S. Case No.431 of 2023 dated 31.05.2023 under Sections 448/376 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶3

In the matter of : Samir Biswas

¶4

… petitioner Mr. Asraf Mandal ... for the petitioner Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee ... for the State

¶5

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶6

The present petitioner is the brother-in-law of the complainant who is the wife of one Suresh Biswas. There is a proceeding under Section 144 Cr.P.C. pending between the parties i.e. the present petitioner and husband of the informant prior to the present case over the land disputes. The aforesaid proceeding was filed on 2^nd May, 2023. The present FIR by the informant has been filed on 31^st May, 2023, after about 22 days delay but the delay has not been explained.

¶7

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. it is found from the words used, that there has been allegation of outraging of molesty but in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., there is allegation of committing rape. Such allegation of rape does not get support from other statements of the witnesses on record. The witnesses are stating about outraging of molesty, only “slilatahani”.

¶8

¶9

Regard being had to such facts and submissions, factum of permanent residence of the petitioner, nature of allegation and substantial progress in investigation, it is directed that the petitioner shall be released on bail by the Arresting Officer in the event of his arrest in the aforesaid P.S. case on such terms and conditions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including the conditions:

¶10

i) The petitioner is directed to appear before the IO once in a week on the day and time fixed by the IO for the purpose of investigation till submission of Final Form.

¶11

ii) The petitioner shall not threaten, induce or coerce any witness of this case in any manner whatsoever during the currency of this order.

¶12

Accordingly, the prayer for the anticipatory bail is allowed.

¶13

Within 21 days from today petitioner is directed to appear before the I.O. along with a server copy or certified copy of this order.

¶14

The application being CRM(A) 2985 of 2023 is disposed of.

¶15

The Arresting Officer is hereby directed to act upon the server copy of this order.

¶16

(Chitta Ranjan Dash, J.)

¶17

(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)

¶18

Samir Biswas v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir Biswas v. 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

Tapas Chattopadhyay and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Kuddus Sk @ Abdul Kuddus Vs State of West Bengal

Shagupta Sulaiman and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

Makhan Sarkar Vs State of West Bengal

Pankaj Bhageria Vs State of West Bengal

MD Saleque Ali@Salek Sk and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal