Puridham Mondal And ORS v. State Of West Bengal

22.03.2022 Serial no.8 Aloke Ct. No. 29 CRM (A) 1293 of 2022 In re: An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 14.03.2022 in connection with Tehatta P.S. Case No. 87 of 2022 dated 08.02.2022 under Sections 341/325/326/307/354/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

-AndIn the matter of : Puridham Mondal & Ors. ... ...Petitioners Mr. Kallol Mondal, Advocate Mr. Amanul Islam, Advocate Mr.Kishan Roy, Advocate Mr. Sourav Mukherjee, Advocate Mr. Souvik Das, Advocate Ms. Anamitro Banerjee, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioners Mr. Ranabir Ray Chowdhury, Advocate Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, Advocate ... ... For the State Mr. Asraf Mandal, Advocate ... ... For the de facto complainant Petitioners seek anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were falsely implicated. In any event the petitioners are not the main assailants. Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the victim suffered grievous injuries. He refers to three statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where all the petitioners were named as participants in the incident.

Considering the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure naming all the petitioners as the participants in the incident and considering the injury report of the victim and considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioners therein, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. CRM (A) 1293 of 2022 is rejected.

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