Calcutta High CourtCRM (DB)/1437/2022rejected

Umesh Duwedi v. State Of West Bengal

2022-06-09Hon'Ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi,Hon'Ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay4 pages

09.06.2022 sdas rejected C.R.M.(DB) 1437 of 2022 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Howrah Police Station Case No. 66 of 2022 dated 02.02.2022 under Sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In Re : Umesh Duwedi ..... petitioner Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee Mr. S.N. Islam Mr. Debapriya Majumder ... for the petitioner Mr. Neguive Ahmed, learned APP Ms. Amita Gaur ... for the State Petitioner is in custody for 130 days.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is no direct evidence connecting the petitioner with the crime.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner was last seen with the victim boy. On his leading statement, shoe of the victim was recovered.

We have considered the materials on record. Statements of witnesses show that the victim was last seen with the petitioner. CDRs collected in the course of investigation also specify the presence of the petitioner at the place of occurrence. On his leading statement incriminating article has been recovered.

In view of the aforesaid materials on record and gravity of the offence, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The application for bail is, thus, rejected. (Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

C.R.M. 192 of 2018 In Re.: An application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 05.01.2018 in connection with Karimpur Police Station Case No. 136 of 2012 dated 03.07.2012 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code. And In Re : Rabish Kumar Upadhyay ..... petitioner Mr. Asraf Ali ... for the petitioner Mr. Debojyoti Deb ... for the State Having considered the materials on record prima facie disclosing involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime of misappropriation of monies of the innocent depositors and the fact that the petitioner has absconded for a protracted period of time, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

The application for bail is, thus, rejected. (Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)