Manik Mondal v. State Of West Bengal

16.09.2021 Item no.72 Aloke Through Video Conference Ct. No.29 C.R.M. 6079 of 2021 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 07.09.2021 in connection with Ketugram P.S. Case No. 343 of 2020 dated 26.09.2020 under Sections 406/418/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In the matter of : Manik Mondal ... Petitioner Md. Imtiaz Ahmed, Advocate Md. Amar Zaki, Advocate Ms. Smita Saha, Advocate Ms. Supriya Majumder, Advocate Mr. Sk. Saidullah, Advocate Ms. Arunima Mukhopadhyay, Advocate Mr. Debopam Roy, Advocate ... for the Petitioner Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, Advocate ... for the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the transactions in questions are entirely civil in nature. Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner claiming to represent a Non-Governmental Organization entered into contracts with several persons in the locality for cultivation with the object of cheating. The petitioner did not pay the cultivators any money. He draws the attention of the Court to the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

C.R.M. 6079 of 2021 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J.)