Prantosh Dhar v. State Of West Bengal

02.12.2020 SL No.7 pk CRM 9652 of 2020 (CRAN 1 of 2020) (Through Video Conference) In Re: - An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Mekhliganj Police Station Case No. 23 of 2020 dated 24.01.2020 under Sections 498A/304B of the Indian Penal Code.

And In the matter of: Prantosh Dhar ....Petitioner.

Mr. Jagriti Mishra ...for the Petitioner.

Mr. Niloy Chakraborty, Mr. Tapan Bhattacharya ...for the State.

Petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition/application as per Rules within a month of resumption of normal functioning of the Court. Subject to such undertaking, the application is taken up for hearing through video conferencing. Accordingly, the application being CRAN 1 of 2020 is disposed of.

It is submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner that there are certain change of circumstances after rejection of the earlier bail petition. Unfortunately, the learned advocate failed to apprise the Court what is the change of circumstance after rejection of the earlier bail petition. Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that earlier bail petition was rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench. There is no change of circumstance. Therefore, Court should not entertain

the application for bail. He further submits that the petitioner is the principal accused.

Considering the submissions advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the parties and after perusing the case diary, our considered view is that there is no change of circumstance after rejection of earlier bail petition which deserves interference by this Hon'ble Court.

Accordingly, the present application for bail being CRM 9652 of 2020 is rejected.

All parties are to act on a website copy of this order on the usual undertaking.

(Samapti Chatterjee, J.) (Kausik Chanda, J.)