Najmul Hoque @ Ma Kalu v. State Of West Bengal

01.08.2022 Serial no. 32 [Dd] (Anticipatory bail) (Rejected) CRM (A) 3655 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No. 679 of 2021 dated 12.09.2021 under Sections 342/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

-AndIn the matter of : Najmul Hoque @ Md Kalu ... ...Petitioner Mr. Amitabha Karmakar, Mr. Arup Kr. Bhowmick, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury, Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, Advocates ... ...For the State Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that a thief was assaulted by a mob. The petitioner was falsely implicated.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the statement of eye-witnesses recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He submits that proclamation of arrest of warrant was issued against the petitioner.

Death of a person is involved.

The statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure of the eye-witnesses implicates the petitioner. There is a pendency of warrant of arrest against the petitioner.

In such circumstances, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. CRM (A) 3655 of 2022 is dismissed.

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