Putul Chandra Barman @ Putul Barman v. State Of West Bengal

Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri 28.8.2019 26.

as (Allowed).

C.R.M. 713 of 2019 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 31.06.2019 in connection with Dinhata P. S. Case No.683 of 2013 dated 15.06.2013 under Sections 325/326/302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In the matter of : Putul Chandra Barman @ Putul Barman. ... Petitioner.

Mr. Sudip Guha.

...for the Petitioner.

Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, ld. A.P.P., Mr. Aniruddha Biswas.

.....for the State.

Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the coaccused persons have been granted anticipatory bail and no overt act has been attributed to him.

Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner had absconded since 2013.

Having considered the materials on record and keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioner in the alleged crime and the fact that the co-accused persons viz.,

Uttam Adhikary and Atul Barman who are similarly circumstanced with the petitioner have been granted anticipatory bail, we find no reason not to extend the same privilege to the petitioner also.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner viz., Putul Chandra Barman @ Putul Barman shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each subject 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 petitioner shall appear before the trial court and pray for regular bail within a fortnight from date.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Manojit Mandal,J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)