Ashit Barman @ Saltu v. State Of West Bengal

(AD) 04.01.2022 C.R.M. 9011 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 Raiganj Woman P.S. Case No. 27 of 2017 dated 20/05/2017 under Sections 506/323/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. And In the matter of: - Ashit Barman @ Saltu ...petitioner.

Mr. Kaushik Choudhury Ms. Busra Khatoon ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Tanmoy Kumar Ghosh Ms. Sonali Bhar ...for the State.

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated.

Learned Advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the contents in the case diary including the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the victim lady.

Considering the gravity of the offence and the complicity of the petitioner therein and considering the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the victim lady, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

petitioner is rejected.

C.R.M. 9011 of 2021 is dismissed.

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