Mithun Hazra v. State Of West Bengal

07.07.2022 Serial no.34 Aloke CRM (A) 3211 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Pingla Police Station Case No. 310 of 2021 dated 08.11.2021 under Sections 498A/323/307/354B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. -AndIn the matter of : Mithun Hazra ... ... Petitioner Mr. Rajib Kr. Acharyya, Advocate Mr. Goutam Malik, Advocate Mr. Banshi Badan Maity, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. D. Chatterjee, Advocate Ms. Sreyashi Biswas, Advocate Mr. Surajit Saha, Advocate ... ...For the State Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated.

Learned Advocate appearing for the State draws the attention to the materials in the case diary. He submits that the petitioner is the husband of the de facto complainant. The complaint was filed within seven months of the marriage. Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein as transpiring from the materials in the case diary, and considering the fact that the complaint was filed within 7 years of marriage we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. CRM (A) 3211 of 2022 is dismissed.

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