Milon Sk @ Sukurulla Sk v. State Of West Bengal
27.01.2022 Serial no. 40 Dd (Through Video Conference) CRM (A) 294 of 2022 In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Beldanga Police Station Case No. 186 of 2018 dated 14.05.2018 under Sections 147/148/149/302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 Arms Act. -AndIn the matter of : Milon Sk @ Sukurulla Sk ... ...Petitioner Mr. Rabiul Islam, Mr. Samiul Akhtar Munshi, Advocates ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Saibal Bapuli, ld. APP Ms. Sajanti Sasntra, Advocates ... ...For the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner claims parity with two other coaccused granted anticipatory bail in CRM 7689 of 2020 and CRM 1243 of 2021.
Learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner cannot claim parity with two other coaccused. He relies upon an order dated December 4, 2020 passed in CRM 8536 of 2020 where another co-accused was not granted anticipatory bail, in view of the fact that such co-accused was named in the First Information Report. The present petitioner is named in the First Information Report.
In the facts of the present case, it appears that persons who were not named in the First Information Report were granted anticipatory bail in CRM 7689 of 2020
and CRM 1243 of 2021. Another co-accused named Akbar Ali was named in the First Information Report and was not granted anticipatory bail in CRM 8536 of 2020. The petitioner is named in the First Information Report. The petitioner cannot claim parity with the other co-accused who were granted anticipatory bail in CRM 7689 of 2020 and CRM 1243 of 2021. Rather the case of the petitioner falls within CRM 8536 of 2020 where anticipatory bail was denied.
Consequently, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
CRM (A) 294 of 2022 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)