The High Court examined an application to cancel anticipatory bail. Since no post-bail misconduct was established, the order was dismissed and the bail was allowed to continue.
No cancellation of anticipatory bail; bail allowed to continue pending further orders.
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.
08.05.2023 26 Ct. No. 29 CHC
C.R.M. 2997 of 2018
In Re:- An application for under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
And
In the matter of : Biswajit Pal @ Biswajit Paul
...… petitioner
Mr. Atis Kumar Biswas, Mr. Amit Singh, Ms. Jyoti Agarwal .…for the petitioners
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, Ld. A.P.P. Mrs. Sonali Das .…for the State
Mr. S. K. Humauyan Reza,
Mr. Altaf Hossain
….for the opposite party no.2/priavate opposite party
The application is directed against order dated June 9, 2016 passed by the coordinate Bench.
The application is pending since 2018.
On the query of the Court, as to whether there is any post bail misconduct from the part of the private opposite party or not, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner refers to the conduct of the private opposite party prior to grant of anticipatory bail.
State and the private opposite party are represented.
2
No post bail misconduct being established in course of hearing we find no ground to cancel the anticipatory bail granted on June 9, 2016.
C.R.M.2997 of 2018 is disposed of accordingly.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the anticipatory bail granted on June 9, 2016, should be cancelled due to alleged post-bail misconduct.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Biswajit Pal @ Biswajit Paul
State
Debangsu Basak
Md. Shabbar Rashidi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
