17.08.2026 Serial no. 36 [Srimanta] Ct. No. – 39 Bail Allowed CRM (A) 2035 of 2026 In re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G. R. Case No. 897/2026 arising out of Nandigram Police Station Case No. 342/2026 dated 28.04.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/11(2)/109(1)/316(2)/351(2)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act pending before the Learned A.C.J.M., Haldia, Purba Medinipore -And- In the matter of : SUMAN PRASAD KAR @ SUMAN PRASHAD KAR … … Petitioner Sk. Rajaul Alam, Mr. Subodh Ranjan Ray, Advocates … … For the Petitioner Ms. Madhurai Sinha, Advocate … …For the State Mr. Subhadeep Chatterjee, Advocate …For the De Facto Complainant 1. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the marriage took place on 4th March, 2026. De facto complainant only stayed at the matrimonial home for one and half month. Thereafter, on 25.04.2026 a salishi was held between the parties for their separation. On that day, the entire streedhan has been taken by the father of the de facto complainant. The petitioner draws attention to the receipt of the said articles. Other in-laws are on anticipatory bail. 2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits anticipatory bail may be allowed on any terms and conditions. 2 3. On the other hand, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits the victim was assaulted by the present petitioner and tried to kill her. The in-laws also beaten her and driven out from the matrimonial home. He also refutes the receipt of articles. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel representing the State also opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and produces the case diary and relies upon the injury report of the victim. 5. Let the Memo of Evidence be taken on record. 6. Having heard the submission of the respective parties and on perusal of the materials-on-record and case diary as well as the injury report this Court finds she only suffered superficial wound. It does not constitute prima facie 109(1) of the BNS, 2023. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that custodial detention of the petitioner is not necessary in the instant case. 8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, namely, SUMAN PRASAD KAR @ SUMAN PRASHAD KAR is allowed. 9. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of arresting officer on the terms and condition as he deems fit and proper and also 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. 10. In the event, the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions as imposed by this Court, the prosecution shall be at liberty to pray for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by this Court in accordance with law. 3 11. The application for anticipatory bail being CRM(A) 2035 of 2026 is, thus, allowed. 12. All concerned parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 13. Criminal Section is directed to supply urgent certified copies of this order to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all necessary formalities. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)