Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23786 (CAL)

SADDAM PURKAIT v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

CRM (A)/1605/2026 · 2026-06-17

Jay Sengupta

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

17/06/2026 D/L – 43 Court No.28 S. Kundu Allowed C.R.M.(A) 1605 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023. In connection with Singur P.S case no. 386 of 2025 dated 17/07/2025 under Sections 115(2)/316(2)/351(2)/352/74/85/89/3(5) of the BNS. In the matter of: Saddam Purkait ...Petitioner. Mr. Sanat Kr. Das Mr. Sujan Chatterjee Mr. Rohan Bavishi …for the petitioner. Mr. Sayan Mukherjee …for the State. 1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the brother-in-law of the alleged victim. The marriage between the couple took place in 2020. Thereafter, the husband and the in-laws had been torturing her. After the victim became pregnant for the first time, the husband took her and forcibly got the feotus aborted. Even on the second occasion when she was in the family way, it is alleged in the FIR that the petitioner, the husband and in-laws assaulted her resulting in miscarriage. The petitioner stays separately and he is in no way connected with the alleged offence. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the case diary and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the FIR, the statements of witnesses and the statement of the victim recorded before the learned Magistrate as well as the medical records. While 2 in the FIR, she had stated that the husband, the petitioner and the others assaulted her, which resulted in the second miscarriage, in her statement before the learned Magistrate, she stated that it was the husband who kicked her resulting in the second miscarriage. 3. Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the fact that charge sheet has been submitted, although I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, his movement shall remain restricted for a limited period. 4. In the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each 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 further conditions that the petitioner shall surrender before the jurisdictional Court and pray for bail within four weeks from date. The petitioner shall stay outside the jurisdiction of Singur Police Station for a period of two months except for meeting the Investigating Officer or attending the jurisdictional Court and shall not threaten or intimidate the witnesses. 5. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is allowed. 6. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities. (Jay Sengupta, J.)