27.07.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.640 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (A) 2191 of 2026 In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Garhbeta Police Station Case No. 230 of 2026 dated 30.05.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/109/351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. And In Re : Nayan Ghana @ Nayan Kumar Ghana ... Petitioner. Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati, Ms. Swastika Chowdhury ... For the Petitioner. Mr. Subhasis Pachhal, Ms. Anita Pandey ... For the State. Ms. Pinki Chakraborty ... For the de facto complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the marriage was solemnized eight years ago and so far as the present case is concerned, the same was registered after 11 days. There are hardly any materials to support the contention of the complainant and the present case has been initiated for settling scores. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant submits that there was earlier case instituted in the year 2022 being Medinipur All Women P.S. Case No. 116/2022 dated 05.11.2022 when the complainant was mercilessly assaulted and thrown out of the house and thereafter a settlement was arrived at pursuant to which complainant returned back to matrimonial home. Presently 2 she has been again assaulted. There is a minor son and a minor daughter of the complainant. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. I have taken into account the facts of the present case as well as the medical report. Although the medical report may not be of much relevance in the present case, but so far as the antecedent of the present petitioner is concerned and genesis of the dispute, I am of the view that it would not be prudent to grant the relief as prayed for. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. Memo of Evidence submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State be kept with the record. The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 2191 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. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)