Court No. 19 (265719) 13.02.2026 (AD 9) (S. Banerjee) WPA 29758 of 2025 Achma Khatun Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Shuvanil Chakrabarty Ms. Chandana Ghosh …for the petitioner Mr. Ashim Kumar Ganguly Mr. Debasis Sur …for the State The petitioner claims to be the wife of the respondent no. 4. The petitioner lodged a complaint against the husband and father in-law as well as the second wife of the respondent no. 4 by a letter dated October 14, 2025. Petitioner states that since the petitioner refused to accept the proposal of her father- in-law of illicit physical relationship with the petitioner, the private-respondent no. 5 tried to outrage her modesty. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that no effective steps have been taken by the police authorities excepting registration of the complaint. He further submits that though the prayer for bail of the husband has been rejected, but thereafter the police authorities have not taken any step to apprehend the husband of the petitioner. 2 Learned advocate appearing for the State files a report of the Inspector in-Charge, Matia Police Station dated January 6, 2026, which is taken on record. The said report states that pursuant to the complaint lodged by the petitioner an FIR being Matia Police Station Case No. 337 of 2025 dated October 15, 2025 under Sections 85/316(2)/64(1)/62/3(5) of the BNS and Section 4 of the D. P. Act has been registered and the case is under investigation. The report further states that prayer for anticipatory bail at the instance of the 5th and 8th respondent was allowed, however, the prayer for bail of the 4th respondent was rejected. The report further states that the investigating officer conducted several raids to arrest the respondent no. 4 and in that regard the investigating officer obtained technical support from the special operation group of Basirhat Police District to apprehend him. The respondent no. 4, according to the report, is still absconding and sources have been engaged to find the whereabouts of the absconding accused person. At this stage the learned advocate appearing for the State submits that the petitioner prayed for return of the Stridhan articles to the petitioner and the investigating officer requested the petitioner to take back the Stridhan articles which she refused. 3 This writ petition stands disposed of by directing the investigating officer to take steps in accordance with law so as to apprehend the respondent no. 4 as expeditiously as possible. It will also be open to the petitioner to take back the Stridhan articles. The authorities of the local police station are directed to keep a strict vigil at the locale and to ensure that no breach of peace takes place at the locale. It is, however, made clear that in the event the petitioner approaches the police authorities complaining of any cognizable offence, steps in accordance with law shall be taken by them. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)