JATAN DAS Vs. SATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners/accused namely Jatan Das, Smt. Sibu Das, lalmohan Das and Narayan Das have filed this application for review and /or modification and/or rectification of the order dated 18. 1. 2008 passed by this court in C. R. M. No. 489 of 2008 rejecting their prayer for bail in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 4 (3) of 2007 arising out of Kakdwip Police Station case No. 93 dated. 4. 7. 2005 under Sections 376/387/507/511/120b of the indian Penal Code while considering the bail application of the aforesaid four petitioners along with two others namely Laxmikanta Das and Smt. Karunamayee Das, released on bail pursuant to order dated 18. 1. 2008 passed in C. R. M. No. 489 of 2008.

(2.) THE main submission of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that there is mistake of both fact and law by this Court rejecting the bail prayer of the aforesaid four petitioners because of incorrect submission of the learned P. P. appearing for the State coupled with erroneous observation of the learned Trial Judge. According to him, learned P. P. appearing on behalf of the State cannot escape his liability by making statement that he made his submission simply relying on the order of the learned Trial judge while he should know that it is his basic duty to go through the case diary in the interest of justice and to give exact version of the same before the court, so that justice delivery system does not turn to disrepute.

(3.) PER-CONTRA, the learned P. P. appearing for the State contends that there is no factual basis in the submission as made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and this Court after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and after perusing the materials from the case diary had passed the order, rejecting the prayer for bail of these petitioners. Learned P. P. vehemently submits that this Court, once having rejected the prayer for bail by order dated 18. 1. 2008, is not competent to review and/or reopen and/or alter their own order in view of the mandate of the provision of Section 362 of the code of Criminal Procedure.