Md. Danial Raj And ANR v. State Of West Bengal

CRM No.900 of 2021 (Via video conference) 16.04.21 (S.R.) Sl.260 Ct.28 In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Goalpokher Police Station Case No.169 of 2018 dated 22.05.2018 under Sections 341/323/324/325/326/307/34 added Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25(1-B)(a)/27/25) of the Arms Act (G.R. Case No.897 of 2018);

And In re: Md. Danial Raj & Anr.

... petitioners.

Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed Mr. Ghazala Firdaus Mr. Mofakkerul Islam Mr. Supriya Majumder Sk. Saidullah Ms. Arunima Mukhopadhyay Mr. Debopam Roy ... for the petitioners.

Mr. N. Ahmed Md. Anwar Hossain ...for the State.

Mr. Ahmed, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been made scapegoat in the alleged incident. They are innocent of the charges which are levelled against them.

Mr. Hossain, learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and draws the attention of this Court to the statement of the witnesses. He also submits that the petitioners have been evading due process of law and the investigation had to be concluded without their cooperation.

Having regard to the nature of the allegations, which were available from the statement of the witnesses, we find complicity of the present petitioners. As such, we are not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail, being CRM

No.900 of 2021 is rejected.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)