Hakimuddin and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2024)

Hakimuddin and Anr. Vs State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail allowed for petitioner no. 2 (Mustafa @ Md. Mustafa): release in the event of arrest on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions, weekly meetings with the I.O. till final report, and appearance before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur in G.R. Case No. 1300 of 2024 within two weeks. Anticipatory bail rejected for petitioner no. 1 (Hakimuddin); application disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioner no. 1 (Hakimuddin) in connection with Chopra Police Station Case No. 281 of 2024. +1 more

Court's answer

Having considered the materials available in the case diary, the nature of injury sustained by the victim and the statement of the victim directly implicating petitioner no. 1, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 1.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the nature and extent of involvement of petitioner no. 2, the Court held that his custodial interrogation is not necessary.

Key takeaways

In the event of arrest, petitioner no. 2 (Mustafa @ Md. Mustafa) is to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.ratio¶12
Petitioner no. 2 shall meet the I.O. once in a week till submission of the final report.ratio¶12
Petitioner no. 2 shall appear before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur, in connection with G.R. Case No. 1300 of 2024 within two weeks from date.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail (S.438 CrPC) in Chopra Police Station Case No. 281 of 2024 dated 08.05.2024 under Sections 498A/307 IPC, pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur: refused to petitioner no. 1 (Hakimuddin) in view of the case diary materials, the nature of injury sustained by the victim and the victim's statement directly implicating him. Granted to petitioner no. 2 (Mustafa @ Md. Mustafa), custodial interrogation being unnecessary: release in the event of arrest on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), subject to Section 438(2) conditions, weekly I.O. meetings till final report, and appearance before the said Court in G.R. Case No. 1300 of 2024 within two weeks. Application partly allowed and disposed of (Calcutta High Court, Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar, JJ., 12.07.2024).

12.07.2024 Court No.29 Item No. 14

Partly Allowed

sg CRM (A) 2158 of 2024

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Chopra Police Station Case No. 281 of 2024 dated 08.05.2024 under Sections 498A/307 of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur.

And In Re: Hakimuddin & Anr. Petitioners Mr. Ayan Basu Mr. Amit Roy Mr. Sumit Routh For the Petitioners Ms. Diksha Ghosh For the State Md. M. Nazar Chowdhury Ms. Sanchayita De MA Salik For the defacto complainant

The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case.

The learned Counsel for the State has produced the case diary and opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

The learned Counsel for the de-facto complainant has also opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the materials available in the case diary, the nature of injury sustained by the victim and the statement of the victim directly implicating the petitioner no.1, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1. However, considering the nature and extent of involvement of

2

the petitioner no.2, we are of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner no. 2 is not necessary.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner no. 2 namely, Mustafa @ Md. Mustafa , shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the petitioner no. 2 shall meet the I.O. once in a week till the submission of final report. The petitioner no.2 shall appear before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Islampur, Uttar Dinajpur, in connection with G.R. Case No. 1300 of 2024 within two weeks from date.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 2 is allowed. The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 1 is rejected.

CRM (A) 2158 of 2024 is, thus, disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Soumen Sen, J.)

(Uday Kumar, J.)

Signed By : SANJIB GHOSH High Court of Calcutta 12 th of July 2024 05:27:10 PM