26.02.2025 11. Ct. No. 28 SG [Allowed] C. R. M. (A) 562 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Manikchak Police Station Case No. 928 of 2024 dated 07.12.2024 under Section 69 of BNS. And In Re: Sk Nasim. … … Petitioner Md. Wasim Akram. … for the petitioner Mr. Md. Adil Badr, Ms. Poulami Bose. …. for the State Mr. Sandip Ray. … for the de facto complainant 1. Petitioner submits parties were adults and there was free mixing amongst them. After he obtained employment in the central force he has been falsely implicated in a series of cases to compel him to marry the lady. He has been granted pre-arrest bail in one case and prays for similar relief in the present case. 2. Learned Advocates for the State oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail. 3. Learned Advocate for the de facto complainant submits petitioner had practiced deception and induced the victim to cohabit with him. A family arrangement was made that they would marry. Subsequently, petitioner retracted. 4. We have considered the materials on record. Both the parties are adults and there was free mixing between them. In the first case de facto complainant contended she was already 2 married to the petitioner and alleged she was subjected to cruelty. In the said case petitioner has been granted pre-arrest bail. In the present case de facto complainant alleged petitioner had compelled her to withdraw the earlier case and cohabited with her on the promise of entering a lawful marriage. 5. Having considered the aforesaid materials on record, we note the parties were adults and had cohabited with one another out of love. In the first case de facto complainant portrayed herself as a married lady. Subsequently, in the present case she claimed there was a family settlement for marriage which has not fructified. In this background, we are of the opinion it is debatable whether the de facto complainant had cohabited on the promise of marriage. On the contrary, cohabitation had preceded the alleged family arrangement between them. Custodial interrogation for progress of investigation is not necessary. 6. Under such circumstances, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner viz., Sk Nasim 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 also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. He shall appear before the jurisdictional court and pray for regular bail within four weeks from date. 3 8. Application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)