Suvendu @ Subhendu Baskey Vs the State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2024)

Suvendu @ Subhendu Baskey Vs the State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Prayer for anticipatory bail allowed and application disposed of: in the event of arrest, petitioner to be released on bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions, weekly reporting to the Investigating Officer until final report, restraint from entering Daspur Police Station jurisdiction (except to meet the I.O.), disclosure of present address, and appearance before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sadar, Hooghly within two weeks; non-compliance entails automatic cancellation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in Dadpur Police Station Case No. 75 of 2024 / G.R Case No. 812 of 2024 under Sections 498A/447/448/354(B)/323/307/34 IPC, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Court's answer

Having perused the case diary, the nature and extent of the petitioner's complicity in the alleged offence, and the victim's statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the Court held that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the petitioner Suvendu @ Subhendu Baskey 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, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and compliance with the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Key takeaways

Conditions imposed: the petitioner shall meet the Investigating Officer once a week or as called until the final report; he shall not enter the jurisdiction of Police Station Daspur, Hooghly where the de-facto complainant resides (except to meet the I.O.); he shall inform the I.O. of his present address; and he shall appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sadar, Hooghly within two weeks. Non-compliance of any condition results in automatic cancellation of the anticipatory bail without further reference to the Court.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC granted to the petitioner-husband named in Dadpur Police Station Case No. 75 of 2024 (G.R Case No. 812 of 2024) under Sections 498A/447/448/354(B)/323/307/34 IPC. Perusing the case diary, the extent of the petitioner's complicity, and the victim's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, the Court found custodial interrogation unnecessary and directed that, upon arrest, he be released on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two like sureties (one local), subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions, weekly meetings with the Investigating Officer until filing of the final report, abstention from entering Daspur Police Station jurisdiction where the de-facto complainant resides (save to meet the I.O.), disclosure of his present address, and appearance before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sadar, Hooghly within two weeks, failing which the anticipatory bail stands automatically cancelled. Application allowed and disposed of. (Soumen Sen and Sugato Majumdar, JJ.)

11.07.2024 Court No.29 Item No. 28 Allowed

ar

CRM (A) 2328 of 2024

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Dadpur Police Station Case No. 75 of 2024 dated 14.03.2024 corresponding to G.R Case No. 812 of 2024 under Sections 498A/447/448/354(B)/323/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In Re: Suvendu @ Subhendu Baskey

Petitioner Ms. Shalini Bairagi Mr. Priyamkar Ganguly For the Petitioner Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld.APP Mr. Sayan Deb Kumar For the State

Mr. Manoj Adak For the De-facto Complainant

The petitioner is the husband of the de-facto complainant. It is submitted that after 16 years of marriage a false complaint was lodged against the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the State has referred to the injury report and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

We have perused the case diary, the nature and extent of complicity of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner namely, Suvendu @ Subhendu Baskey 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, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also to comply with the conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of

Signed By : AMITAVA ROY High Court of Calcutta 12 th of July 2024 12:19:24 PM

2

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a week or as and when called for till the submission of the final report and shall not enter the jurisdiction of Police Station Daspur, Hooghly where the de-facto complainant is presently residing, except for the purpose of meeting the I.O till the submission of the final report. The petitioner shall also inform the I.O regarding the present address, where he shall be presently residing and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Sadar, Hooghly within two weeks from date. In the event of non-compliance of any of the conditions, the anticipatory bail shall stand automatically cancelled without any further reference to this Court.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is allowed and the same is accordingly 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)

(Sugato Majumdar , J)

Signed By : AMITAVA ROY High Court of Calcutta 12 th of July 2024 12:19:24 PM