Calcutta High CourtCRM/7764/2021rejected

Imteyaz Ahmed v. State Of West Bengal

2021-12-06Hon'Ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi,Hon'Ble Justice Bivas Pattanayak4 pages

06.12.2021 sdas rejected C.R.M. 7764 of 2021 (via video conferencing) In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Maidan Police Station Case No. 58 of 2015 dated 20.03.2015 under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C )/29 of the NDPS Act.

And In Re : Imteyaz Ahmed ..... petitioner Mr. Joy Chakraborty ... for the petitioner Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan Mr. Palash Chandra Maity ... for the State Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody for six years and seven months. He prays for bail of the petitioner.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the trial is at its fag end. We have considered the materials on record. There are prima facie materials connecting the petitioner with the alleged crime. Trial is at its fag end. Accordingly, we are not inclined in granting bail to the petitioner The application for bail is, thus, rejected. However, we request the trial court to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six months from the next date fixed for recording of evidence

without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

C.R.M. 192 of 2018 In Re.: An application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 05.01.2018 in connection with Karimpur Police Station Case No. 136 of 2012 dated 03.07.2012 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code. And In Re : Rabish Kumar Upadhyay ..... petitioner Mr. Asraf Ali ... for the petitioner Mr. Debojyoti Deb ... for the State Having considered the materials on record prima facie disclosing involvement of the petitioner in the alleged crime of misappropriation of monies of the innocent depositors and the fact that the petitioner has absconded for a protracted period of time, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

The application for bail is, thus, rejected. (Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)