X BEING THE MOTHER IN LAW OF VG v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR
CRM (A)/947/2026 · 2026-05-14
Jay Sengupta
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21275 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 21275 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
14.05.2026 Court No.28 Item No.104 ssi CRM (A) 947 of 2026
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in connection with Harirampur Police Station Case No. 23 of 2025 dated 01.02.2025 under Sections 107/80/85/3(5) of BNS 2023 read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Sections 9/10 of the Prohibition Child Marriage Act. And In the matter of: X & another. …. Petitioners
Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya Ms. Anushka Bose Ms. Rai Das
…for the petitioners
Mr. Pritam Roy
..Amicus Ms. Sima Ghosh
…for victim girl
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 being the mother in law of the victim was arrested and therefore, her application for anticipatory bail is not pressed. So far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, he is the brother in law of the alleged victim. There are only omnibus allegations against him. The prime allegations are against the husband who was arrested and thereafter granted bail. It was alleged that the said principal accused fell in love with the 17 year old victim, got married to her and thereafter abetted her suicide.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. She submits that all the accused had tortured the victim.
2
Learned Amicus assisting the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He relies on the statements of witnesses and the post mortem report. Charge sheet has been submitted.
Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary, the fact that one of the principal accused being the husband was arrested and was thereafter granted bail and the fact that charge sheet has been submitted, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner no.2 is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him.
The application for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no.1 is dismissed as not pressed.
In the event of arrest, the petitioner no.2 shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and on further conditions that the petitioner no.2 shall surrender before the learned jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks from this date and shall attend the jurisdictional Court regularly. The petitioner no.2 shall not threaten or intimidate the witnesses.
The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
(Jay Sengupta, J.)