KRISHNA MURARI SINGH Vs. STATEOFWEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved by the Order passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chandanagar in G.R. Case No. 13 of 2002 on 15.7.2002 whereby the interim bail granted by his Honour on 7.1.2002 was confirmed, this application has been taken out on behalf of the Complainant for setting aside the same.

(2.) To substantiate the said prayer learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, who has placed before us the entire ordersheets from day one submitted that on the very first day the interim bail was granted by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate without perusing the Case Diary and subsequently although there was prayer for cancellation of the same at the behest of the Investigating Agency and notwithstanding the fact on the basis of the prayer of the latter section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added on 26.2.2002 confirmation of the interim bail was absolutely unjustified and requires to be set aside. He further submitted that such lenient view should not have been taken by the learned Magistrate while acceding to the prayer for interim bail on the very first day of production without giving time to the Investigating Agency to collect the materials. Further much stress was made on the prayer for cancellation before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate which was not considered; instead the interim order was confirmed.

(3.) Learned Advocate for the petitioner as a part of his submission referred to a Division Bench decision of this Court in State of West Bengal vs. Noor Ahmed & Anr., 2002(1) CHN 727 to substantiate his point that when an order was passed on erroneous presumption the same can be easily cancelled even at a later stage.