SWARUPNAGAR POLICE STATION CASE No. 22 of 2023 · Calcutta High Court

Mr. Manas Kr. Das ... for the petitioner. Mr. Sandip Chakraborty Mr. Manoranjan Mahata ... for the State. Heard learned counsels for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. The co accused have been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge earlier. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. The petitioner appears to be the principal accused. Statement of an eye witness recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure indicates that the petitioner allegedly poured poison in the mouth of the victim. The petitioner cannot be said to be similarly circumstanced with the co accused who have been granted bail earlier. Considering the gravity of the offence and prima facie involvement of the petitioner therein, prayer for bail is rejected at this stage. The application for bail is thus disposed of. Case diary be returned. 2 All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Suvra Ghosh, J.)