19.08.2026 Court No.551 Item No.28 tbsr CRM (A) 2454 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with Bongaon P.S. Case No. 427 of 2026 dated 22.05.2026 under Sections 406/467/468/471/498(A) of the Indian Penal Code. And In the matter of: ANJALI PAL AND ORS. ….Petitioners. Mr. Amitava Chowdhury Mr. Debasis Sur Mr. Dilip Kumar Das Ms. Rekha Das …for the petitioners. Mr. Ramashis Mukherjee Mr. Rohan Bavishi …..for the State. Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury Mr. Binay Shaw …. For the Opposite Party No. 2. 1. It is the allegation as against the petitioners that the son of petitioner no. 1 and 2 and the brother of petitioner no. 3 was married to the de facto complainant. Her husband died. After the death of the husband of the de facto complainant, the petitioners, in collusion with each other prepared false documents and misappropriated the money lying to the credit of the husband of the de facto complainant in bank accounts. 2. Learned advocate for the petitioners relies upon a writing dated September 12, 2023, by which the de facto complainant allegedly relinquished her rights and claims in respect of the properties left by her deceased husband. It has been alleged against the petitioner no. 4 that at the behest of the petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3, he issued false heirship certificate in favour of the petitioner 2 nos. 1, 2 and 3. On the basis of such certificate issued by the petitioner no. 4, the other petitioners settled the account lying in the name of the deceased husband of the de facto complainant and misappropriated the entire money. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the instant case has been initiated after three years of September 12, 2023, when the de facto complainant relinquished her rights in respect of the properties left by her deceased husband, by a writing. 3. It transpires from the materials in the case diary that the petitioners settled the account lying in the name of the deceased husband of the de facto complainant i.e. son of the petitioner no. 1 and 2 and brother of the petitioner no. 3. 4. Apparently, the disputes raised are purely civil in nature. In answer to a query of this Court, if the de facto complainant has approached any civil forum for declaration of her rights or title, the answer is in the negative. 5. In such circumstances, considering the nature of allegations and the material in the case dairy, I am incline to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, with two sureties of like amount each, 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, 1973, corresponding to Section 482(2) of the 3 BNSS and on further condition that the petitioner nos. 2 and 4 shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight till the conclusion of investigation, the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 shall cooperate with investigation till conclusion of the investigation and on condition that the petitioners shall appear on every date before the jurisdictional Court on and from the date fixed for appearance of the accused and in default the jurisdictional Court will pass appropriate order to secure the presence of the petitioners in Court including cancelling the anticipatory bail granted without further reference to this Court. 7. Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is allowed. 8. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)