In Re Tarik Ajij vs State

In Re : CRAN 2196 of 2020

Petitioner undertakes to affirm and stamp the petition/application as per Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the court. Subject to such undertaking, the application is taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

Petitioner renews his prayer for bail.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is in custody for more than 312 days. It is further submitted that co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner along with others mercilessly assaulted the victim suspecting him to be a thief.

We have considered the materials on record. We note that the allegations against the petitioner and other co-accused persons appear to be similar. Although it is argued that certain weapons have been recovered from the petitioner, we are of the opinion that in view of the protracted period of detention suffered by the petitioner and since there is little possibility of the trial concluding in the near future, further detention of the accused/petitioner may not be necessary.

Therefore, the accused/petitioner, namely Tarik Ajij, be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandannagore, Hooghly subject to condition that the said petitioner shall appear before the trial court on every date of hearing until further orders and shall not intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever.

In the event he fails to appear before the trial court without justifiable cause, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail automatically without reference to this court.

The application for bail, thus, stands allowed.

CRAN 2196 of 2020 is also disposed of.