IN RE SAFIUR RAHAMAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State.

(2.) On 09.07.2014 Mr. Abhijit Mukherjee, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners had very candidly stated before the other Hon'ble Division Bench that he has instructions not to proceed with the application for anticipatory bail. He made the statement in the presence of Mr. Madhusudan Sur, who had appeared for the State. The application was, accordingly, dismissed. That order has been brought on record at page Rs.6'. Within four months thereafter the petitioners have again filed this application without specifying the reasons as to why they have chosen to file a second application when they had instructed Mr. Mukherjee not to proceed with their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

(3.) We cannot appreciate such a practise being followed because, according to us, it amounts to "Bench hunting". Moreover, from the materials in the case diary and the statement of the victim girl, we are satisfied that the petitioners are not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail.