01.09.2026 Court No.551 Item No.3 tbsr Allowed CRM (A) 2483 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Cossipore P.S. Case No. 95 of 2026 dated 28.05.2026 under Sections 85/89/316(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. And In the matter of: Nitesh Kumar Shaw & Anr. ….Petitioners. Mr. Soumya Nag Mr. Pradeep Pandey …for the petitioners. Mr. Madan Mohan Roy Mr. Kuntal Roy …..for the State. 1. Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner is taken on record. 2. None appears on behalf of the de facto complainant, despite service. 3. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioners is taken up for consideration. 4. Upon hearing the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned advocate for the State, it appears that petitioner no. 1 is the husband of the de facto complainant and petitioner no. 2 is her mother-in-law. According to the case made out by the prosecution, the de facto complainant was subjected to physical and mental torture by the petitioners on demand of further dowry. It transpires from the materials in the case diary that the victim was married to petitioner no. 1 in the year 2025. Since then, she was subjected to torture. At the time of hearing, 2 learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case by the de facto complainant after the petitioners sent a legal notice to the de facto complainant alleging torture upon the family members of the petitioners, followed by a GD entry lodged by the petitioner no. 1. 5. From the material in the case diary, it appears that a case has been made out in the written complaint itself, that the marriage of the victim with the petitioner no. 1 was the outcome of a love affair between the two for a considerable period of time. However, an allegation has been made that even though the marriage was out of love and affection between the two parties, the family members of the present petitioners demanded dowry. 6. According to the case made out in the First Information Report, the victim was driven out from her matrimonial house in the month of February, 2026. In January 2026, the petitioner has complained of forcible abortion. 7. Learned advocate for the State relies upon the medical documents contained in the case diary. Such documents go to show that the victim was admitted in a private hospital complaining that “the patient presented with mucoid discharge and pain in abdominal since last two days”. She was admitted on February 23, 2026. None of the documents collected in course of investigation does disclose any allegation as against the present petitioners, nor were the petitioners named in connection with any incident of forceful termination of pregnancy, before the doctor. 3 8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the materials in the case diary, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. 9. 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 BNSS and on further condition that the petitioner no. 1 shall meet the Investigating Officer once in a fortnight till the conclusion of investigation, the petitioner no. 2 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. 10. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2483 of 2026 is disposed of. 11. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities. (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)