Saiyad Md Saddam @ Sayed Md Saddam v. State Of West Bengal

28.03.2022 Serial no. 29 [Dd] (Anticipatory bail Rejected) CRM(A) 1401 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Shibpur Police Station Case No. 375 of 2021 dated 26.10.2021 under Sections 326/307/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code, (G.R. NO. 6085/2021) -AndIn the matter of : Saiyad Md Saddam @ Sayed Md Saddam ... ...Petitioner Mr. Manjit Singh, Mr. Gaganjyot Singh, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, Mr. Imtiaz Ahmed, Mr. Ayan Bhattacharrya, Mr. A. K. Upadhyay, Mr. Antarikha Basu, Mr. Ashok Das, Sk. Saidullah, Advocates ... ...For the de facto complainant Ms. Zareen N. Khan, Mr. Arup Sarkar, Advocates . ....For the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated. The petitioner was absent on the date of the incident at the locale. The petitioner was travelling from Mumbai on the fateful day. The police filed charge sheet and, therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the injury report of the victim and

to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

In the statement of the victim, the injured names the petitioner as the mastermind of the incident. The injury suffered by the victim is serious in nature.

The de facto complainant is represented.

Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein, the nature of the injury and the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

CRM(A) 1401 of 2022 is dismissed.

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