The Jail bail industry! SIX BAILs in one day @ one HC alone. Imagine how many all over India

The Jail bail industry! SIX BAILs in one day @ one HC alone. Imagine how many all over India & total cost of all these bail !!
*****************************************************
These SIX bail orders (all connected to 498A), were ordered by the Hon. Kolkatta HC, dated 10 Sep 2014 and were found on a casual search by this blogger.

There may be many more such bail orders in this (Kolkatta) HC and there are bound to be many more all around the country.

Consider Rs. 50,000 to 100,000 per bail order at HC level and work out the industry size !!!

Some of these cases also involve 304B !!

It is pertinent to note that even in cases where 304B is mentioned on the subject line, there is NO major discussion of the case… Just bail issued in a short order

******************* BAIL ORDER # 1 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Bimal Namadas & Others vs State of West Bengal

Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

10.09.2014

C.R.M. 9138 of 2014 BD

Re: An application for bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 5th August, 2014 in connection with Tufanganj Police Station Case No. 51/2014 dated 22.02.2014 under Sections 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

**********************************************************
In the matter of : Bimal Namadas & Others.
… Petitioners Mrs. Minoti Gomes, Mr. Md. Hafez Ali.
… For Petitioners Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury.
… For State Heard learned advocate of both the parties.
**********************************************************

Learned advocate of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the in laws of the victim and the husband of the victim has already been granted bail.

Having considered the materials in the case diary and specially considering the fact that the petitioners are the in laws of the victim and the husband of the victim has already been granted bail, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners in this case is not necessary. There is also no apprehension of abscondence of the petitioners.

We are, therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) each with one surety of like amount each to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer and subject to conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed.

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J)

(Sudip Ahluwalia, J)

******************* BAIL ORDER # 2 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Arun Biswas & Ors vs State of West Bengal

10 September, 2014

Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

10.09.14 641/akd (Allowed)

C. R. M. No. 9524 of 2014

In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 08.08.2014 in connection with Gaighata Police Station Case No. 618 of 2014 dated 29.07.2014 under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

**********************************************************
And In the matter of:
Arun Biswas & Ors…. Petitioners
Mr. Sanat Chowdhuri … for the Petitioners
Mr. Sunirmal Nag … for the State Heard the learned Advocate of both the parties.
**********************************************************

Having considered the materials in the case diary, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners in this case is not necessary. There is also no apprehension of abscondence of the petitioners.

We are, therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) each, with one surety of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

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

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.)

(Sudip Ahluwalia, J.)

******************* BAIL ORDER # 3 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Author: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee

Sadhan Halder …petitioner.
Versus
State of West Bengal …opposite party.

C.R.M. 10736 of 2014

10 September, 2014

In the matter of : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on August 22, 2014 in connection with Chapra Police Station Case No. 367 of 2014 dated May 17, 2014 under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code;

**********************************************************
And In the matter of : Sadhan Halder …petitioner.
Versus State of West Bengal …opposite party.
Mr. Sumanta Das, …for the petitioner. Mr. Prasun Dutta, Mr. Subrata Roy, …for the State.
**********************************************************

We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have been falsely implicated in the instant case.

Having considered the materials in the case diary, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary. There is, also, no chance of abscondence of the petitioner.

We, as such, direct that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, namely, Sadhan Halder, he shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer, subject to the conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed.

( Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. ) dns
( Subrata Talukdar, J. )

******************* BAIL ORDER # 4 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Sk. Shahajan Ali vs State of West Bengal on 10 September, 2014

Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

10.09.14 663/akd (Allowed)

C. R. M. No. 12343 of 2014

In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 03.09.2014 in connection with Duttapukur Police Station Case No. 479 of 2014 dated 20.06.2014 under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

**********************************************************
And In the matter of: Sk. Shahajan Ali … Petitioner
Mr. Md. Shahjahan Hossain, Ms. Sanjida Sultana … for the Petitioner.
Ms. Ratna Ghosh … for the State Heard the learned Advocate of both the parties.
**********************************************************

Having considered the materials in the case diary, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner in this case is not necessary. There is also no apprehension of abscondence of the petitioner.

We are, therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only), with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

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

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.)

(Sudip Ahluwalia, J.)

******************* BAIL ORDER # 5 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************

Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Smt. Vijay Laxmi Jaiswal vs State of West Bengal

10 September, 2014

Author: Subhro Kamal Mukherjee

C.R.M. 10613 of 2014

In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on August 21, 2014 in connection with Baranagar Police Station Case No. 523 dated July 27, 2014 under Sections 498A, 406,307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

**********************************************************
And In the matter of: Smt. Vijay Laxmi Jaiswal …Petitioner.
Mr. Abhishek Verma …for the petitioner.
Ms. Purnima Ghosh …for the State.
**********************************************************

Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties. Perused the case diary.

Having considered the materials in the case diary, we are of the opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioner is not necessary.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, namely, Smt. Vijay Laxmi Jaiswal, she shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) only with one surety of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and, also, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

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

(Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J.) ( Subrata Talukdar, J.)

******************* BAIL ORDER # 6 (no specific sequence ) ****************
****************************************************************************************
Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)

Surajit Ghosh & Ors vs State of West Bengal

10 September, 2014

Author: Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay

10.09.14 675/akd (Allowed)

C. R. M. No. 11798 of 2014

In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 01.09.2014 in connection with Tehatta Police Station Case No. 625 of 2014 dated 17.08.2014 under Sections 498A/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

****************************************************************************************
And In the matter of: Surajit Ghosh & Ors.
… Petitioners Mr. Biswajit Sarkar … for the Petitioners
Mr. Pratick Bose … for the State
****************************************************************************************

Leave is granted to the learned Advocate-on-record of the petitioners to correct the cause title of the Application for Anticipatory Bail by mentioning the correct year of the Police Station case.

Heard the learned Advocate of both the parties.

Having considered the materials in the case diary, we are of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners in this case is not necessary. There is also no apprehension of abscondence of the petitioners.

We are, therefore, inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 3,000/- (Rupees Three thousand only) each, with one surety of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to conditions as laid down in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

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

(Pranab Kumar Chattopadhyay, J.)

(Sudip Ahluwalia, J.)

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF – Save Indian Family movement. SIF as a concept is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog or write to e _ vinayak @ yahoo . com (please remove spaces). Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.

******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

*****************
FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
regards
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist
Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s