Babul Aakatar @ Bablu Aktar & Ors vs State

Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. Petitioners undertake to affirm and stamp the petition/application as per Rules within a month

of resumption of normal functioning of the Court. Subject to such undertaking, the application is taken up for hearing through video conference.

Accordingly, the application, being CRAN 3294 of 2020, is disposed of.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there was a free fight and injuries were received at both ends. Learned Advocate appearing for the

State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the victim suffered bomb blast injuries and one of them was hospitalised.

We have considered the materials on record. Injuries appear to be grievous and one of the victim was hospitalised.

In view of the aforesaid facts, we are not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner Nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 10 herein.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner Nos.1 to 5 and petitioner Nos.7 to 10 are rejected.

However, keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioner no.6 in the alleged crime, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner

no.6.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioner, viz., Abdul Sakim Sk. shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-,

with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the order downloaded from the official

website of this Court.