IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] *** CRM(A)/1/2025 RE: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Pahargaon Police Station Case No. 189 of 2024 dated 22.12.2024 under Section 103 of the BNS, 2023. And In the matter of : Archana Kumari @ Archana Dhanakodi and another … petitioners Mr. Deep Chaim Kabir, Sr. Adv. Mr. S.Ajith Prasad … for the petitioners Mr. Sumit Karmakar … for the State April 9, 2025 [AKB] Item No.10 1. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. There is no material showing that the petitioners have engaged the contract killers who allegedly murdered the victim lady. 2. It is further submitted that there is no call details report between the petitioners and the arrested accused persons. There is no direct bank transaction between the petitioners and the contract killers who were already arrested. The petitioners will cooperate with the investigating authority if they are granted anticipatory bail. It is not correct that the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 2 absconded from Andaman & Nicobar Islands, since the petitioner No.1 married petitioner No. 2 and her matrimonial home is at Tamil Nadu. As the investigation is complete there is no need for custodial detention of the petitioners and they will cooperate with the investigating authority if their prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed on conditions that may be put by the Court. 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail vehemently. According to him there are sufficient incriminating materials against both the petitioners including the bank transactions was made by one Chinnadurai, the brother of the petitioner No. 2 with the contract killers at the instructions of the present petitioners. The call details found in the mobile phone of the contract killer were sent to forensic laboratory for report and after getting the said report the investigating authority will submit supplementary charge sheet. The petitioners had eliminated the victim lady after engaging contract killers who murdered the victim lady in a gruesome manner and the materials on record are sufficient to show the involvement of the present petitioners along with others in the commission of the offence. If the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail the prosecution will suffer a lot. There are chances of absconsion, since they were not apprehended by the concerned police personnel even after visiting their residence at Tamil Nadu and non-bailable warrant of arrest are pending against both of them. The learned counsel for the State has also drawn the attention of this Court to the relevant portion of the bank transactions details where from it is found that the brother-in-law of the petitioner No. 1 and brother of the petitioner No. 2 i.e. Mr. Channadurai had played active role indirectly to keep the involvement of the present petitioners in the commission of offences secret. 4. I have considered the materials on record. It appears that investigation is complete. It is true that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioners. The mobile phones of the present petitioners are still in their possession and the concerned Investigating Officer did not have the opportunity to collect those mobile phones. From the record it is found that the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence. It is further true that there is no direct bank transaction showing that the present petitioners had transferred fund to the contract killers though there are sufficient materials showing that one of their relatives had transferred certain fund to the accused persons who are in the custody. The record also shows that there was enmity between the victim lady and the present petitioner No.1 over some property. As the investigation is complete I think no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping them in custody. Considering all aspects of the matter I allow the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners on certain conditions. 5. In the event of arrest the petitioners be enlarged on bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) each, with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each, out of which one must of the local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair and also on condition that petitioners shall remain within the jurisdiction of Pahargaon Police Station and the petitioner No. 2 shall meet the Investigating Officer twice in a week until further order. They shall comply with the conditions as laid down in Section 482 (2) of BNSS. In the event of failure on their part to comply with any of the conditions, the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners shall stand cancelled. The petitioners are directed to appear and surrender before the concerned court at Port Blair within 7 (seven) days from date, and hand over their mobile phones to the Investigating Officer against a proper seizure list to be drawn by the said officer in accordance with law. 6. On their surrender before the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Port Blair the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall recall the warrant of arrest as issued by him. The anticipatory bail application being CRM (A)/1/2025 is thus disposed of accordingly. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)