IN THE MATTER OF: SUJIT MONDAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A curious case has been brought before me during the vacation. The urgency is no longer germane, since leave was given to move it on grounds of urgency by a coordinate bench. The questions raised are.

(2.) In respect of the self-same allegation in the self-same criminal case the co-accused of the petitioner has moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has passed an order on October 1, 2018 that the said petitioner shall not be arrested in connection with any of the cases mentioned in prayer (i) of the petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner before this Court submits that he is similarly situated as the said petitioner before the Supreme Court referred to at page 49.

(3.) On October 11, 2018, an application for anticipatory bail was moved by the present petitioner before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court. There, only on the basis of the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated October 1, 2018, a prayer was made for anticipatory bail. It was rejected by the Hon'ble Division Bench on October 11, 2018 on a clear finding that considering the nature of the allegations against the petitioner it would be extremely imprudent to excuse the petitioner from custodial interrogation and facilitating the petitioner with tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses or destroy the morale of the complainants even before the trial had commenced. It was held to be against public interest.