AIRRNEWS

Become a member

Get the best offers and updates relating to Liberty Case News.

― Advertisement ―

Sidley Advises Joint Bookrunners and Lead Arrangers on Ardshinbank’s US$600 Million Eurobond Offering

Sidley advised Citibank, J.P. Morgan, Oppenheimer, and Mashreq in their roles as joint bookrunners and lead arrangers on Ardshinbank’s successful US$600 million Eurobond...
HomeHigh CourtCalcutta High Court (Appellete Side)Kishori Mohan Rabidas vs Unknown on 22 July, 2025

Kishori Mohan Rabidas vs Unknown on 22 July, 2025


Kishori Mohan Rabidas vs Unknown on 22 July, 2025


Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Kishori Mohan Rabidas vs Unknown on 22 July, 2025

Author: Jay Sengupta

Bench: Jay Sengupta

22/07/2025
 D/L 33
Ct. No.28
 S.Kundu                        C.R.M.(A) 1531 of 2025
 Rejected


                  In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under
              section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
              2023/under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
              In connection with Sagardighi police station case no. 40 of
              2024       dated      2.2.2024        under        sections
              406/409/417/420/471/34 of the IPC.

                 In the matter of: Kishori Mohan Rabidas
                                                             ... Petitioner

                         Mr. Debasis Kar
                                                      ...for the petitioner.
                         Ms. Sreyashee Biswas
                         Ms. Nandini Chatterjee
                                                           ...for the State.


             1.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits that a co-accused has been granted anticipatory

bail by this Court on 29.11.2024 in CRM (A) 4164 of

2024. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in this

case.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on

the case diary and the report filed earlier and submits

that the other co-accused was the Manager of the Bank

against whom there was an allegation that he cheated a

sum of Rs.82,000/- from the customer’s account. He was

granted anticipatory bail specifically because he had

refunded the said amount. But, the present petitioner

who is the Cashier of the Bank had embezzled a sum of

Rs.11,34,600/- from the accounts of the customers and

had not returned back any money.

2

3. Considering the serious nature of allegations, the

materials available in the case diary and the fact that the

co-accused/petitioner is not standing on the same footing

as the co-accused who was granted anticipatory bail

earlier, I do not consider this to be a fit case to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is

rejected.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

2