Satarupa Bhattacharya vs Enforcement Directorate
2023 Latest Caselaw 1634 Cal

13.03.2023 Sl. No.11.

D/L.

Mithun.

Ct.No.42.

CRR/738/2023

Satarupa Bhattacharya Vs.

Enforcement Directorate, Kolkata Zonal Office

Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Anindya Ghosh, Adv.

Ms. Sofia Nesar, Adv.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Phiroze Edulji, Adv.

...for the Enforcement Directorate.

The issue involved in the instant revision is that the

petitioners namely Souvik Bhattacharya and Smt. Satarupa

Bhattacharya entered appearance before the Special Court in M.L.

Case No.13 of 2022 in pursuance of summons issued by the

learned Judge, Special Court (CBI), Court No.1, Kolkata on 22 nd

December, 2022. It is needless to say that the said summons were

issued as per the provision of Section 61 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure.

Vide order No.28 dated 7th January, 2023, appearance of the

petitioners were recorded. The petitioners have filed application for

bail separately. Surprisingly enough, the petitioners were not

taken to custody. On the contrary, the learned Judge fixed 7 th

February, 2023 for hearing of the bail application. Subsequently,

the hearing of such bail application was deferred on 22 nd February,

2023.

It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of

the petitioners that when the above named accused persons were

not taken to custody, they were entitled to be released on bail on

the date of their appearance in pursuance to summons.

In support of his contention, he also refers to the final

judgment of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of

Investigation and another reported in 2022 Vol.11 SCALE 114.

He specially referred to Paragraph 73(e) where the Hon'ble Supreme

Court has issued a guideline to the effect that there need not be

any instance of a bail application while considering the application

under Sections 88/170/204 and 209 of the Code.

Thus, it is contended by the learned Senior Counsel that the

learned Trial Judge has committed a material irregularity by not

taking the petitioners in custody on the date of their surrender and

subsequently they cannot be taken to custody on rejection of their

application for bail.

Mr. Edulji, learned Advocate appears on behalf of the

Enforcement Directorate.

The petitioner is directed to serve copy of the application to

Mr. Edulji in course of this day.

Mr. Edulji seeks a fortnight time to file affidavit-in-

opposition.

Time is granted.

The Enforcement Directorate is at liberty to file affidavit-in-

opposition within 30th March, 2023 and serve a copy of the same to

the learned Advocate on record on behalf of the petitioner.

The petitioner is at liberty to file affidavit-in-reply, if any,

within 7 days thereafter.

Let the matter be listed on 10th April, 2023.

Pendency of the instant revision will not restrict the

petitioners from moving necessary application for bail in the Trial

Court.

( Bibek Chaudhuri, J. )