Alauddin @Bura v. The State Of West Bengal

13.04.2022 Serial no.91 [Dd] (Bail Rejected) CRM 8952 of 2021 In re : An Application for Bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Pukhuria Police Station Case No.

of dated 06.05.2018 under Sections 364/302/201/120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 9(b) of the Indian Explosives Act, corresponding to G.R. Case No.752/2018.

-AndIn the matter of : Alauddin @ Bura ... ...Petitioner Mr. Milon Mukherjee, ld. Sr. adv.

Mr. Safiur Rahaman, Mr. Rahul Ganguly, Mr. Sourav Paul, Advocates ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Neguive Ahmed,ld APP Ms. Amita Gaur, Advocates ... ...For the State Mr. Arindam Jana, Mr. Kaushik Dey, Advocates .. ...For the de facto complainant Petitioner renews the prayer for bail.

Learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner canvasses essentially two points for the grant of bail. He submits that the petitioner is undoubtedly detained in custody by reason of the defaults of the police not filing the supplementary charge sheet against three of the accuseds. He draws the attention of the Court to the first charge sheet submitted.

He submits that some of the accuseds were discharged in the charge sheet. There are three persons against whom, the police are yet to file charge sheet and, therefore, question of framing of charges cannot arise. The

petitioner is languishing in jail since 2019. He submits that supplementary charge sheet not being submitted against three of the other co-accuseds, it would not be possible to split the trial.

Learned Additional Public Prosecution submits on the basis of the instructions of the Investigating Officer present in Court that supplementary charge sheet would be submitted in respect of other co-accuseds within a period of three months from date.

The de facto complainant is represented.

Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioner therein as transpiring from the materials in the case diary and considering the fact that there is hardly any material change in circumstances subsequent to the earlier order of rejection, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. CRM 8952 of 2021 is dismissed.

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