Sakidul Sekh v. State Of West Bengal

20.10.2020 SL No. 103 Sdas allowed CRM 8105 2020 (via video conferencing) In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Rejinagar P.S. Case No. 173 dated 27.06.2020 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In the matter of : Sakidul Sekh .........Petitioner. Mr. Navanil De Mr. R. Chakraborty ...for the Petitioner.

Ms. Zareen N. Khan Mr. A. Banerjee ...for the State.

It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is a family dispute between the parties and petitioner had lodged an earlier case against the defacto complainant and her husband. Trial is in progress in the said case. Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having considered the materials on record and bearing in mind the nature of allegations in the light of the submission relating to preexisting enmity, we are of the opinion that though custodial interrogation may not be necessary, movement of the petitioner requires to be restricted in order to instil confidence in the mind of the defacto complainant and other witnesses.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on

further condition that petitioner shall not enter the jurisdiction of Rejinagar Police Station until further orders and shall provide the address where he shall presently reside to the investigating agency. He shall report to the officer-in-charge of the concerned police station within whose jurisdiction he shall presently reside once in a week until further orders.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)