Sk Mukhelem @ Sk Muslem v. State Of West Bengal

02.01.2023 Serial no. 29 [Dd] (Anticipatory bail) (Rejected) CRM (A) 5997 of 2022 In re : An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Kharagpur (Town) Police Station Case No. 475 of 2021 dated 03.09.2021 under Sections 341/328/365/368/376(2)/ 323/506/34 of the IPC -AndIn the matter of : Sk. Mukhelem @ Sk. Muslem ... ...Petitioner Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra, Advocate ... ... For the Petitioner Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee, Advocates ... ...For the State Petitioner prays for anticipatory bail.

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

The de facto complainant was married. She converted her religion to marry the petitioner. Subsequently, the present police complaint was lodged.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the statement of the de facto complainant recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. He submits that the de facto complainant was tortured. He refers to the medical examination report of the de facto complainant and submits that, cigarette burn injury was found on the body of the de facto complainant.

De facto complainant implicates the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C.

The physical torture as claimed in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. stands apparently corroborated by the medical examination report of the de facto complainant.

In such circumstances, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. CRM (A) 5997 of 2022 is dismissed.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)