17.07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.922 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. partly allowed C.R.M. (A) 804 of 2026 In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Dhantala Police Station Case No. 1089 of 2025 dated 23.12.2025 under Sections 85/80(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (G.R. Case No. 5438 of 2025). And In Re : Sk. Tahidur Rahaman and another ... Petitioners. Mr. Sanat Kumar Das, Mr. Sujan Chatterjee, Mr. Rohan Bavishi ... For the Petitioners. Mr. Somnath Adhikary, Ms. Moumita Pandit ... For the State. Mr. Mijanul Kabir, Ms. Luna Khatoon, Md. Wasim Akram, Mr. Bapparaj Dey, Mr. Raju Sk ... For the de facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioner no.1 is father-in-law and petitioner no.2 is sister-in-law of the deceased. The marriage was solemnized for one and a half years and the incident complained of took place at the parental house of the deceased. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that since the husband is a police officer, the investigation is not being properly carried out. 2 Learned advocate appearing for the State also opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and produces the case diary with voluminous documents including the statements of all possible witnesses. I have taken into account the fact that after ten days, the deceased left for her parental home. She hanged herself at the parental home. Having considered the peculiar features of the case as also the fact that the petitioner no.2 is physically challenged, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the petitioner no.2 in connection with the instant case is unwarranted. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no.2 is allowed. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner no.2 viz., Thamina Khatun shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on such terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. So far as the petitioner no.1 viz. Sk. Tahidur Rahaman is concerned, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. Report submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 804 of 2026, is, thus, disposed of. All concerned parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 3 Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)