Judgment · High Court

Mr. Sanjib Kumar Mukhopadhyay Md. Nasim Ali Ms. Nargish Parveen Ms. P. Roy …for the petitioner. Mr. Aniket Mitra ….for the WBSEDCL No one appears on behalf of the State. Heard the learned counsels for the petitioner and the Electricity Authority. Considering the nature of allegations contained in the FIR and the fact that 50 per cent of the finally assessed amount has been paid to the Electricity Authority without prejudice, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant 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, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as 2 laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on further condition that the petitioner shall cooperate with investigation, shall meet the I.O. once a fortnight till submission of report in final form and shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for. (Jay Sengupta, J.)