Prasenjit Dome @ Prasenjit Badyakar v. State Of West Bengal

17.11.2020 ssd 19.

CRM 7475 of 2020 with CRAN 1 of 2020 (Via Video Conference) In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Pandabeswar P.S. Case No.112 of 2018 dated 28.09.2018 under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

And In the matter of: Prasenjit Dome @ Prasenjit Badyakar ....Petitioner.

Mr. Kunal Ganguly ...for the Petitioner.

Mr. Neguive Ahmed Ms. Manisha Sharma ...for the State.

The petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition as per the Rules within one week of resumption of normal functioning of the court. The petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.

Since the State cannot produce any material against this petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail. The State speaks of some extra-judicial confession. However, such confession is of no effect unless corroborated by the circumstances. There is virtually no material to connect the petitioner to the commission of the offence.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be enlarged on bail on furnishing security of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. The petitioner should abide by

the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

CRM 7475 of 2020 along with the interim application therein stand disposed of.

(Sanjib Banerjee, J.) (Aniruddha Roy, J.)