Sahin Alam v. The State Of West Bengal

02.01.2025 sdas Rejected C.R.M. (A) No. 4679 of 2024 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in connection with Lalgola Police Station Case No. 933 of 2024 dated 12.09.2024 under Sections 420/409 of the Indian Penal Code. And In Re : Sahin Alam ..... petitioner Mr. Tapodip Gupta .....for the petitioner Mr. Suman De Ms. Baishakhi Chatterjee ..... for the State 1.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits he was an employee of the de facto complainant-company and has been falsely implicated. He prays for anticipatory bail. 2.

Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

3.

We have considered the materials on record. De facto complainant-company is a business correspondent of the Induslnd Bank. Petitioner was appointed by the de facto complainant. In course of his duties he collected monies from loanees but did not account the same. Custodial interrogation for recovery of stolen money is necessary. Accordingly, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)