Gopal Chandra Singha v. State Of West Bengal

27.06.2022 Ct. No. 29 KAUSHIK REJECTED C.R.M.(A) 3012 of 2022 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Haldia Police Station Case No. 64 of 2022 dated 19.05.2022 under Sections 406/409/420/465/468/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. And In Re : Gopal Chandra Singha ...... petitioner Mr. Parvej Anam ....for the petitioner Mr. Saibal Bapuli Mr. Bibaswan Bhattacharya ....for the State Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is a disbursing officer of the Life Insurance Company Limited (LIC). The allegation as against the petitioner is wrongful deduction of Rs.248/- per month from the bank account of the de-facto complainant.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the materials in the case diary. He submits that, the petitioner is instrumental in issuance of a forged LIC policy and for such purpose, a sum of Rs.248/- was being deducted from the account of the de-facto complainant from 2019 onwards.

On a query of the Court as to whether any LIC policy was issued in favour of the de-facto complainant is forged or not, learned advocate for the petitioner is unable to answer such query. On instructions, he offers to pay the whole amount to the de-facto complainant.

In view of the stand taken by the petitioner in Court, the necessity of custodial interrogation cannot be ruled out. Apparently, the petitioner is implicated in the issuance of a forged LIC policy deductions from the account of the de-facto complainant ostensibly for such forged LIC policy. Consequently, 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 (A) 3012 of 2022 is dismissed.

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