AB/11/2024 of RAJAT TAMANG Vs THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND 3 ORS. on 5 November 2024

1. The State of Meghalaya,Represented through SecretaryAnd Commissioner,Home Police Department,Government of Meghalaya,Meghalaya.Represented through SecretaryAnd Commissioner,Home Police Department,Government of Meghalaya,Meghalaya.

2. The State of West BengalRepresented through SecretaryAnd Commissioner,Home Police Department,Nabanna 13[th] Floor, 325,Sarat Chatterjee Road,Shibpur, Howrah,Government of West Bengal,West Bengal,Pincode – 711102.Represented through SecretaryAnd Commissioner,Home Police Department,Nabanna 13[th] Floor, 325,Sarat Chatterjee Road,Shibpur, Howrah,Government of West Bengal,West Bengal,Pincode – 711102.

3. The Superintendent of Police,Kalimpong Khasmahal,Kalimpong Khasmahal, Kalimpong District,West Bengal,Pincode – 734301.4.The Superintendent of Police,Darjeeling,Richmond Hill,West Bengal,Pincode – 734101.

…… Respondents

Coram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge Appearance:For the Petitioner/Appellant(s): Mr. S. Chanda, Adv. viceMr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv.For the Respondent(s): Mr. R. Gurung, GA.Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP. for R 1.i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.:ii) Whether approved for publication in press:Yes/No JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. This is an application filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of extraterritorial anticipatory bail/Transitory Anticipatory Bail/limitedanticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner herein, who is said to be involved in cases outside the jurisdiction of this Court in the State of WestBengal. The petitioner being a resident of this State has approached thisCourt with a prayer for grant of such kind of bail to allow him to have asafe passage to the place of occurrence or rather to the jurisdictionalpolice station or court where he can proceed in accordance with law.

3. This Court, at the outset, on prayer made by the parties,pending issuance of notice upon the respondents herein have grantedinterim bail, however, in course of time, it appears that some of therespondents have not yet received notice.

4. Be that as it may, Mr. R. Gurung, learned GA appearing for theState respondent No. 1 has submitted that there is no bar for this Court toallow the interim bail, which in fact, would amount to a transit bail as faras the prayer of the petitioner is concerned. Therefore, it is the submissionof the learned GA that the earlier order passed by this Court grantinginterim bail may be modified to the extent that the same be converted intoa transit bail to allow the petitioner to approach the concerned jurisdictionas desired by him.

5. Without going into the merits of this case, on this ground, thisCourt is inclined to agree with the submission of the learned GA, andaccordingly, the earlier order is modified and the petitioner is grantedinterim bail to allow him to proceed to the place of destination, whereinthe proceeding against him may be agitated. It is made clear that duringthe pendency of this transit bail, the petitioner is not to be arrested orconfined to custody, however, he is directed to secure regular bail, if sodesired within a period of 20(twenty) days from today.

6. This application is accordingly disposed of as indicatedhereinabove.

Judge