Mitali Bardhan Petitioner On Behalf Of Custody Accused Person Sri Mintu Bardhan v. The State Of Tripura

Case No :BA 0000138/2015 Party Name : MITALI BARDHAN PETITIONER ON BEHALF OF CUSTODY ACCUSED PERSON SRI MINTU BARDHAN Vs THE STATE OF TRIPURA THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.TALAPATRA Heard Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the accused person as well as Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State. In terms of the order dated 28.10.2015, Mr. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. has produced the case diary.

This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in favour of the accused person in connection with Amtali P.S. case No.2015 AMT 111 under Section 406 of the I.P.C.

Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the accused person has submitted that the accused person has no master-servant relationship with the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.TR-01-1738. He is a ration shop dealer. By written ejahar, one Laxman Chandra Das who was has claimed to be the owner of the said vehicle revealed that his vehicle was carrying consignment of 300 bags of sugar for delivery. The consignment was being carried from Silchar. But the said vehicle was located in the Amtali-Khayerpur bypass road. The informant has categorically alleged that the driver of the vehicle has misappropriated those 300 bags of sugar and fled away leaving the vehicle on the said place.

During investigation, the accused person was arrested and according to the investigating agency he made the disclosure statement giving a detail of a close-knit conspiracy. The principal accused, namely Jadab Saha, the driver of the vehicle is still at large as the investigating agency could not arrest him. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel has laboured hard to impress this Court that the petitioner is a critical patient of Diabetes. If he is kept out of the treatment, he would face fatal consequences. He has further submitted that the petitioner is not the principal offender. The allegation against him as made by the investigating agency is not based on any sustainable evidentiary material. From the other side, Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P.

appearing for the State while seriously resisting the prayer for bail has submitted that with the criminal tandem of the principal offender, the entire offence has been committed and as such, at this stage of investigation, if the bail is granted to the accused person, who is in custody, it may adversely impact the investigation as a whole. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties as well as on examination of the case diary, this Court is not inclined to grant the bail in favour of the accused person at this stage of investigation. Accordingly, this bail application stands rejected and disposed of. However, the liberty would be granted to the accused person to file a bail application to the competent court and the competent court after due consideration may pass the appropriate order.

The case diary so produced is returned.

Download Date: 8-05-2017 16:05 1/1