Faridul Islam @ Islam Pharidul And ORS v. The State Of West Bengal

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri 01.03.2023.

43.

as (Allowed).

C.R.M. (A) 168 of 2023 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Mekhliganj P. S. Case No.407 of 2022 dated 11.11.2022 under Sections 341/323/325/354/379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In the matter of : Faridul Islam @ Islam Pharidul & Ors. ... Petitioners.

Mr. Anirban Banerjee, Ms. Madhushhri Dutta, ...for the Petitioners.

Mr. Ujjwal Luksom, Mr. Dhiman Sil.

.....for the State.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there was a dispute amongst co-villagers. They pray for bail. Learned Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

We have considered the materials on record. Injuries are simple. Allegation of theft relates to Rs.5,000/-. Under such circumstances, we are of the opinion custodial interrogation of the petitioners for progress of investigation is not necessary and they may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of

Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the trial court and pray for regular bail within a period of four weeks from date. This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Subhendu Samanta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)