Mithu Manjhi @ Maji @ Susmita @ Eshmita v. State Of West Bengal

(AD) 28.03.2022 C.R.M. (A)766 of 2022 Court No.29 (Rejected) In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Asansol South P.S. Case No.55 of 2020 dated 07/02/2020 under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of: - Mithu Manjhi @ Maji @ Susmita @ Eshmita ...petitioner.

Mr. Bitasok Banerjee Mr. Apurba Kumar Datta ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Sanjay Bardhan Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee ...for the State.

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated. Three accused persons were granted bail by the jurisdictional Court. No recovery was made from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is with a child suffering 80% disability.

Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner is involved in the racket of providing jobs to the railways upon consideration. He submits that the petitioner is absconding.

The accused who were granted bail were actually the victim of the process of grant of job to the railways. Apparently, the petitioner is found to be engaged in a racket whereby unsuspecting member of the public are lured for a railway job at a consideration.

Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein and considering the long absconsion of the petitioner, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

C.R.M. (A) 766 of 2022 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)