Sanju Sikder @ Sikdar v. State Of West Bengal

(AD) 01.12.2021 C.R.M. 7615 of 2021 (Via Video Conference) Court No.29 (Rejected) In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Bidhannagar South P.S. Case No. 40 of 2021 dated 04/02/2021 under Sections 420/409/120(B)/468/472/471 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In the matter of: - Sanju Sikder alias Sikdar ...petitioner.

Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty Mr. Shashanka Shekhar Saha ...for the petitioner.

Mr. Rudradipta Nandy ...for the State.

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner draws the attention of the Court to the contents in the First Information Report. He submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated. The de facto complainant obtained benefits of an insurance policy which the de facto complainant opened on his free will and volition. The petitioner did not derive any benefit out of such act. The petitioner accepted the commission as an insurance agent. It is only on the failure of the de facto complainant to pay the premium that the petitioner is sought to be falsely implicated. Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the de facto complainant is about 79 years of age. He was persuaded to open several life insurance policies. The de facto complainant was not made aware of the implications of the policies. The

petitioner stood benefited out of the commission that the petitioner received.

Considering the materials in the case diary, the gravity of the offence and the complicity of the petitioner therein, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

C.R.M. 7615 of 2021 is dismissed.

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