Umesh Kumar Shaw @ Umesh Shaw v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

22.02.2024 SL No. 21 Ct No. 29 SB C.R.M. (A) 590 of 2024 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Amherst Street P.S. Case No. 27 of 2024 dated 25.01.2024 under Section 376/417/420/406 of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of: Umesh Kumar Shaw @ Umesh Shaw ....Petitioner Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Debajyoti Deb Mr. Shyamal Mondal Miss. Somdyuti Parekh Miss. Ahana C. Routh ...for the Petitioner Mr. Jaydeep Biswas ...for the State Mr. Amal Kumar Saha Ms. Irish Paul ...for the de facto complainant Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the de facto complainant are adults. Both are married to different persons. There was a business relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. Petitioner was falsely implicated.

State and de facto complainant are represented. Learned counsel for the State draws the attention of the court to the materials in the case diary including the statement of the de facto complainant recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. and points out that the petitioner took a sum of Rs. 25 lakh and odd from the de facto complainant after selling her flat.

Learned counsel for the de facto complainant submits that petitioner promised to marry the de facto complainant. The petitioner was initially married to one person. Without obtaining divorce petitioner entered into a relationship with the de facto complainant with the promise of marriage. Thereafter, the petitioner married a third person.

Apparently, the de facto complainant was aware of the marital status of the petitioner when she entered into a relationship with him. In fact, the de facto complainant herself was married to another person.

Both the petitioner and the de facto complainant are adults.

Apparently, there are documents to suggests that there was also a business relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant also.

In such circumstances, we grant anticipatory to the petitioner.

Accordingly we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/-, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight. The petitioner shall appear on every date before the Jurisdictional Court on and from the date fixed for appearance of the accused and in default the Jurisdictional Court will pass appropriate order to secure

the presence of the petitioner in Court including cancelling the anticipatory bail granted without further reference to this Court. This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. (Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)