27.08.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item No.248 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION Ct.No.35 dc. Rejected C.R.M. (M) 1424 of 2026 In Re : An Application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed in connection with Usthi Police Station Case No. 354 of 2025 dated 04.08.2025 under Sections 103(1)/238(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In Re : Tanuja Bibi ... Petitioner. Mr. Sagar Saha, Mr. Sandeep Prasad Shaw, Mr. Aman Kumar Singh ... For the Petitioner. Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi ... For the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.08.2025. She has been unnecessarily implicated as an accused, although she happens to be widow of the deceased. According to the learned advocate, the case is based on circumstantial evidence and there are hardly any materials to connect the present petitioner with the crime. As such, petitioner may be released on bail on any stringent condition. Learned advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and produces the case diary. I have taken into account the materials appearing in the case diary. Prima facie, the prosecution case is that the present petitioner along with the other accused were in an 2 illicit relationship and over the said issue, they murdered the deceased. The body was discovered in a decomposed state and it is only after DNA test was conducted, the body of the deceased could be identified. Prosecution in order to substantiate the case has checked the time period as also the petitioner and the principal accused being available at two hotels. To that effect, the hotel registers have been seized and the identification documents of the other accused and petitioner have been seized. Having regard to the overall circumstances and the foundation of the prosecution case along with the motive which is reflecting from the case diary, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. As such, the prayer for 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 bail, being CRM (M) 1424 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.)