Anil Gadi And ORS v. State Of West Bengal
08.09.2022.
15.
Ct.No.28 as (Rejected) C.R.M. (DB) 3034 of 2022 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Sonarpur P.S. Case No.659 of dated 12.06.2022 under Sections 364/364A/365/368 of the Indian Penal Code.
In the matter of : Anil Gadi & Ors.
... Petitioners.
Mr. Sandipan Ganguly, ld. Sr. Adv., Mr. Purnasis Bhuniya, Mr. Ashok Das.
...for the Petitioners.
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy, ld. A.P.P., Ms. Sonali Das.
...for the State.
Mr. Kaustav Bagchi, Mr. Debayan Ghosh, Ms. Priti Kar.
...for the de-facto complainant.
Petitioners are in custody for 78 days. It is contended they had paid money to the victim on the false premise of giving employment. Fake employment letters were also issued to them. They demanded refund of the money. Subsequently, they have been falsely implicated in the case. Criminal case has been registered against the victim.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail. He submits victim had been called by the accused persons and thereafter physically assaulted and abducted to the State of Andhra Pradesh. Ransom money was demanded and part of it was paid to the accused persons. Investigation is still in progress.
Learned Lawyer for the de-facto complainant also opposes the prayer for bail.
We have considered the materials on record including the statement of the victim. From his statement it appears there are monetary transactions between the parties apparently for illegitimate purposes. Victim was lured by the accused persons and thereafter abducted to the State of Andhra Pradesh. Ransom calls were made from mobile phones which were traced to one of the petitioners. Belatedly FIR was registered against the victim. Investigation is still in progress. In view of the aforesaid materials on record and gravity of offence, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners is rejected.
(Ajay Kumar Gupta,J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)