05.02.2025 Sl. No.10 akd [PARTLY ALLOWED] C. R. M. (A) 33 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed on 02.01.2025 in connection with Kaliganj Police Station Case No. 1105 of 2024 dated 13.12.2024 under Sections 64/69/115(2)/74/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In Re: Kiran Biswas & Ors. … … Petitioners Mr. Sabir Ahmed Mr. Amanul Islam Mr. Sourav Mukherjee … … for the petitioners Ms. Minoti Gomes Ms. Puja Goswami … … for the State 1. Victim is present in person. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners there was free mixing between two consenting adults. Subsequently, the marriage could not fructify due to obstruction by the uncle of petitioner no.1. There was no deception at the time of cohabitation. Accordingly, petitioner prayed for anticipatory bail. 3. On the earlier occasion, victim was present in court and expressed her willingness to marry. 4. Under such circumstances, we adjourned the hearing of the application to enable the parties to marry as the victim is willing. Presently we are informed though victim’s family expressed eagerness for marriage, petitioner no.1 is unwilling and has evaded the process. 5. We have examined petitioner no.1’s prayer for pre-arrest bail in light of the aforesaid conduct. Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, inter alia, penalises an accused who induces the victim Signed By : ARUP KUMAR DAS High Court of Calcutta 10 th of February 2025 01:42:24 PM 2 to have sexual intercourse on the false promise of marriage. No doubt, mere failure to keep a promise would not constitute deception in the eye of law. But petitioner no.1’s pre-varicating stance to justify refusal leads to an inference that he had cohabited with the victim on the false promise of marriage. When requested to marry, initially he refused to do so on the excuse that his uncle was unwilling. 6. During hearing of the application, we were informed his family members are willing to acknowledge the match but the petitioner is evasive. This demonstrates patent dishonesty as well as deception from the inception of the relationship attracting the provisions of Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Petitioner no.1 is also not available for interrogation for progress of investigation. 7. In light of the aforesaid materials on record against the petitioner no.1, we do not consider it prudent to grant anticipatory bail to him. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1 namely, (1) Kiran Biswas is rejected. 9. In respect of the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the second, third and fourth petitioners i.e. his relations, we take into consideration Mr. Ahmed’s submission that they did not stand in the way of marriage and are willing to accept the victim as the bride. Under such circumstances, we are of the opinion custodial interrogation of petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 is not necessary and they may be granted anticipatory bail. 10. Accordingly, we direct in the event of arrest, the petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 namely (2) Khosna Biswas @ Rubina Biswas, (3) Tajmaluddin Biswas @ Moti Biswas & (4) Rakesh Biswas, be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) each, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and also subject to the conditions as Signed By : ARUP KUMAR DAS High Court of Calcutta 10 th of February 2025 01:42:24 PM 3 laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and on further condition that the petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 shall appear before the jurisdictional court and pray for regular bail within four weeks from date. 11. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Subhendu Samanta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) Signed By : ARUP KUMAR DAS High Court of Calcutta 10 th of February 2025 01:42:24 PM