In Re.: Sahidul Sk Vs

The petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition/application as per Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the Court. Subject to such undertaking, the application is taken up for hearing through video conference.

The petitioner has been apprehended in connection with Monteswar Police Station Case No. 135 of 2014 dated 16.08.2014 under Sections 448/341/302/201/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25(1B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act.

It is submitted that as many as nine persons were charged under the aforesaid sections, out of which the five persons are already enlarged on bail.

Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that he has obtained a duly certified copy granting bail to three co-accused though he could not collect the orders in relation to the other co-accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner stands on the same footing to that of the other co-accused and no distinction can be drawn even in the investigation.

Learned Advocate appearing for the Prosecution submits that the Memo of Evidence forwarded to her does not reveal any distinction between the other co-accused and the petitioner but opposes the prayer for bail on the ground that she is unaware of the bail having granted to the other co-accused, as submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner.

In view of the submissions so advanced, we do not find any material whereby a distinction can be drawn between the petitioner and the other co-accused because of the complicity of the alleged offence. If the petitioner is standing on the same footing to that of the other co-accused, he should also be treated equally.

Accordingly, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/-, with two sureties of Rs.10,000/-each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalna subject to the condition that the petitioner shall attend the court on each day of the listing of the matter and shall co-operate in the trial and on further condition that the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court till the completion of the Sessions Case without obtaining prior leave from the Trial Court.

In default of not attending the Court on a date so fixed without justifiable cause, it is open to the Trial Court to cancel the bail of the petitioner without further reference to this Court.

The application for bail is, thus, disposed of.

In view of the disposal of the main application, the connected application is also disposed of.