D/L615 19.08.2026 Bpg. Allowed C.R.M. (A) 2619 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Howrah Police Station Case No.226 of 2026 dated 21.05.2026 under Sections 85/316(2)/318(4)/352/299/74/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita; Manzar Hassain @ Manzar Hussain & Anr. Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Suman De. …for the petitioners. Mr. Ranojay Chatterjee Mr. Uttam Basak. …for the State. Mr. A. Das Ms. Syeda Romana Sultan. …for the de facto complainant. Petitioner no.1 is the father-in-law and the petitioner no.2 is the brother-in-law of the informant. Over matrimonial dispute, they have been implicated in the present case. Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and their custodial detention may not be warranted. Learned advocate for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail as the petitioners have not complied with the notice under Section 35 of the BNSS. Learned advocate for the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there are injuries 2 which have been inflicted and the jewelleries along with other gift items/dowry are yet to be seized by the police authorities. Having considered the nature of the accusations and the locus of the present petitioners, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioners may not be warranted. As such, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner no.1, namely, Manzar Hassain @ Manzar Hussain and the petitioner no.2, namely, Ausaf Hussain shall be released on bail 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 corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As the investigation of the case is in progress, the petitioners shall report to the investigating officer of the case within a period of 10 days from date and thereafter on all subsequent dates fixed by the investigating officer of the case for the purposes of investigation. If there is violation of such condition, the investigating officer will bring the same to the notice of the jurisdictional Magistrate who would not hesitate to issue harsher process of law, thereby compelling their appearance and cancel the liberty granted. With the aforesaid observations, CRM(A)2619 of 2026 is allowed. Memo of Evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly 3 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 of all requisite formalities. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)