Priyanka Banik Paul v. State Of West Bengal

SL. 37. CALCUTTA HIGH COURT March 17, 2021. IN THE CIRCUMIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI MNS APPELLATE JURISDICTION C.R.M. 286 of 2021 In Re : An application for anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on February 25, 2021 in connection with G. R. Case No. 2650 of 2020 arising out of Matelli Police Station Case No. 90 of 2020 dated July 1, 2020 under Sections 498A/306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. And In Re : Priyanka Banik Paul ... petitioner.

Mr. Joydeep Bhowmik ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Sourav Ganguly, Mr. Aniruddha Biswas ... for the State.

Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

It appears from the nature of the allegations as well as the materials on record that there is no prima facie evidence sufficient to implicate the petitioner of the apprehended charges.

Accordingly, the application is allowed, granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the arresting officer. The petitioner shall comply with the conditions stipulated in section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM 286 of 2021, is disposed of in the light of the above observations.

(Sabyasachi Bhatttacharyya, J.) (Kausik Chanda, J.)