Rasedul Sarder @ Rashedul Sardar And ANR v. State Of West Bengal

08.07.2022 Serial no.44 Aloke CRM (A) 3259 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Tehatta Police Station Case No. 441 of 2022 dated 02.06.2022 under Sections 341/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25/27 Arms Act.

-AndIn the matter of : Rasedul Sardar @ Rashedul Sardar & Anr. ... ... Petitioners Ms. Minoti Gomes, Advocate Mr. Asraf Mandal, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioners Mr. Madhusudan Sur, ld. APP Mr. Manoranjan Mahata, Advocate Ms. Nandini Chatterjee, Advocate ... ...For the State Mr. Ashok Das, Advocate Mr. Shahan Shah, Advocate ... ... For the de facto complainant Petitioners seek anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were falsely implicated. Learned Advocate appearing for the State draws the attention to the materials in the case dairy including the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He submits that the victim suffered gun shot injuries.

De facto complainant is represented.

The petitioners are named in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The victim suffered gun shot injuries.

In such circumstances, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected. CRM (A) 3259 of 2022 is dismissed.

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