Sk. Saibuddin @ Lalu And ANR v. The State Of West Bengal
05.06.2025 Item No.19 Court No.6 Susanta/ Aminur (Allowed)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION CRM(M) 610 of 2025 In re : An Application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure corresponding to Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case no. 3590 of 2024 arising out of Raidighi Police Station Case No.569 of 2024 dated 05.11.2024 under Sections 103(2)/61(2)(a) of the BNSS, 2023.
-AndIn the matter of : Sk. Saibuddin @ Lalu & Anr. ... Petitioners Mr. Soubhik Mitter, Ms. Rajnandini Das, ...For the petitioner.
Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld. APP, Mr. Dipankar Pramanick, ... For the State.
Mr. Anidya Sundar Das, Mr. Navanil De, Ms. Paramita Mondal, .... For the de facto complainant.
Supplementary affidavit filed along with medical documents of the petitioner no. 1 be kept with the record. Learned Advocate for the petitioners, learned advocate for the de facto complainant and the learned advocate for the State are present.
Heard learned Advocates for the parties.
Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that his client is falsely implicated in the instant case and is in custody for about seven months.
Learned advocate further submits that three co-accused are on bail and the prayer for bail made by the petitioner be considered.
Learned advocate for the State and learned advocate for the de facto complainant object the grant of bail of the petitioner. Learned advocate for the State submits that the present petitioner no. 1 has played a role in this offence as it appears in the statement of the witness of Sona Khan. Upon considering the materials in the case diary and the orders passed by this Court with regard to the three co-accused persons and the involvement as is alleged in the 164 statement of Suvendu Maity the shopkeeper where the place of occurrence took place and the other materials in the case diary, this Court is of the view that considering the nature of involvement of this person and the fact that three co-accused persons who were on the same footing are already on bail and the total number of witnesses which are to be examined in this case this Court is of the view that in the interest of justice, the petitioner should be granted bail.
Thus, I allow the prayer for bail made by the petitioner. The petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be a local, to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. The petitioners upon being released shall meet the Officer-in-Charge of concerned Police Station twice a week, until further orders and shall appear before the trial court on each and every day of substantive hearing subject to the provisions of Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 355 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and shall not intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner shall not
enter within the territorial jurisdiction of concerned Police Station except for the purpose of attending court proceedings and for reporting to the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned Police Station, until further orders. The petitioners shall not meet the person acquainted with the facts of the case and shall furnish the address where the petitioners shall presently reside before the learned trial court, the investigating officer and the Officer-inCharge of the police station under whose jurisdiction they shall presently reside.
In the event the petitioners fails to comply with any of the conditions as stated above, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel their bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court.
Accordingly, the application for bail is disposed of. (Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.)