Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6608 (CAL)

XXXXXXXX v. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRM (A)/287/2025 · 2025-02-13

Debangsu Basak, Md Shabbar Rashidi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

13.02.2025 Sl. No.16 akd [ALLOWED] C. R. M. (A) 287 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed on 15.01.2025 in connection with Howrah Police Station Case No.583 of 2024 dated 01.11.2024 under Sections 85/74/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 8/12 of the POCSO Act. And In Re: XXX & Anr. … … Petitioners Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee Mrs. Suchismita Chakraborty Mr. Debapriya Majumder … … for the petitioners Ms. Urbi Roy Mr. Aveek Bose Ms. Simontini Bhadra … … for the de-facto complainant Mr. Kaushik Kundu Ms. Chandreyi Dutta … … for the State 1. Petitioner no.2 is the sister-in-law of the de-facto complainant and petitioner no.1 is her husband. De-facto complainant’s husband had died and immovable properties were gifted to her and her son. Over this issue, family dispute cropped up. Several suits are pending. All family members including the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. Accordingly, they pray for anticipatory bail. 2. Learned Advocate for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 3. Learned Advocate for the de-facto complainant also oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail. She submits the instant case is independent of the earlier family arrangement whereby properties had been settled in favour of her client and her son. 2 4. We have considered the materials on record. Petitioners are the in-laws of the de-facto complainant. Her husband had died and properties were settled in her favour. Allegation of sexual assault on the minor is levelled against the father-in-law and not the petitioners. Allegations against the petitioners with regard to cruelty are general and omnibus. Under such circumstances, we are of the opinion custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary and they may be granted anticipatory bail. 5. Accordingly, we direct in the event of arrest, the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing a 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 laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and on further condition that the petitioners shall appear before the jurisdictional court and pray for regular bail within four weeks from date. 6. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)