Allowed

Malay Pal@Malay Paul v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC20 Jan 2023CRM(DB)/64/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Calcutta granted bail to the petitioner accused under sections 498A/304B of IPC. The court held that allegations of torture were general and required trial scrutiny, and further detention was not necessary given the length of custody.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with sureties on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 to the jurisdictional magistrate.

Malay Pal@Malay Paul Vs State of West Bengal — Cheque Dishonour | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

20.01.2023

¶2

Sl. No.2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri

¶4

akd [ALLOWED]

¶5

C. R. M. (DB) 64 of 2023

¶6

In Re: An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 18.01.2023 in connection with Ghoksadanga Police Station Case No.255 of 2022 dated 14.07.2022 under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code. (G.R. Case No.766 of 2022)

¶7

And

¶8

In Re: Malay Pal @ Malay Paul

¶9

… … Petitioner

¶10

Mr. Hillol Saha Podder Ms. Mousumi Das

¶11

… … for the petitioner

¶12

Mr. Nilay Chakraborty Mr. Ujjwal Luksom Mr. Arjun Chowdhury

¶13

… … for the State

¶14

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is in custody for about 189 days. It is further submitted victim-housewife had an extra-marital affair. Over this issue, a quarrel ensued. She committed suicide. Investigation is complete.

¶15

Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer

¶16

for bail.

¶17

We have considered the materials on record. Allegations of torture are general and omnibus. It is to be thrashed out during trial whether victim-housewife committed suicide due to torture or owing to depression arising from extra-marital relationship. Investigation is complete. Under such circumstances and in view of the period of detention suffered by the petitioner, we are of the opinion further detention of the accused/petitioner is not necessary.

¶18

Therefore, the accused/petitioner, namely Malay Pal @ Malay Paul , be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one

¶19

¶20

of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar subject to condition that the said petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶21

In the event he fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail automatically without reference to this court.

¶22

The application for bail, thus, stands allowed .

¶23

(Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Malay Pal@Malay Paul v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malay Pal@Malay Paul 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

Amit Maity @ Shibu and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal

Prakash Kumar Gond 2 Praksh Gond Vs State of West Bengal

MD Arif @ Sk Arif Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Dhasu Ghosh Vs State of West Bengal

Rina Gantait and Sridam Gantait Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Manirul Laskar Vs State of West Bengal