Saidul Islam@Saidur Rahaman v. State Of West Bengal

20.09.2021 Ct. No. 29 sdas rejected C.R.M. 2156 of 2021 (via video conference) In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Chanchal Police Station Case No. 1131 of 2020 dated 02.12.2020 under Sections 448/376/323 of the Indian Penal Code. And In Re : Saidul Islam @ Saidur Rahaman ..... petitioner Mr. Kallol Mondal Mr. Musharraf Alam Sk.

.....for the petitioner Mr. P. K. Datta, learned A.P.P.

Mr. Goutam Wilson ....for the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the instant case. He also submits that the victim girl did not undergo a medical test although the statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws attention of the Court to the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On a query from the Court, learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the complaint was lodged four days after the date of the incident. Considering the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and considering the fact that the investigation is ongoing, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected and the application being CRM 2156 of 2021 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.)