High CourtsDivision Bench(2020) 07 CAL CK 0015

In The Matter Of: Mana Sk. @ Mursalim Sk. @ Manarul Sk vs State

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 31 July 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjib Banerjee, J · Aniruddha Roy, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Misc. Case (Bail Application) (CRM) No. 5103 Of 2020, Criminal Application No. 3375 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 162 words

The petitioner undertakes to appropriately stamp the petition as per the Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the court. The

petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.

The petitioner claims that the investigating agency is needlessly proceeding against the petitioner though the petitioner had not been named in the

complaint.

The State says that the petitioner has not been named and it may not be correct for the petitioner to apprehend imminent arrest.

Considering the circumstances, the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

In the event of arrest, the petitioner will be released on bail on furnishing security of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) together with personal

release bond of equal value to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. In addition, the petitioner will also comply with the conditions in Section 438(2)

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

CRM 5103 of 2020 and CRAN 3375 of 2020 are disposed of.