07.10.2026 Court No.35. D/L.41. Rakib (Allowed) CRM (A) 3657 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Shyampur Police Station case no. 398 of 2026 dated 08.07.2026 under Sections 85/108/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. And In the matter of : Sampa Roy & Ors. ……Petitioners. Ms. Ipsita Ghosh ......for the Petitioners. Mr. Palash Chandra Poddar Mr. Rishav Kumar Singh ……for the State. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submit that petitioner no.1 is the daughter-in-law and petitioner no.2 is the father and petitioner no.3 is the brother of the petitioner no.1. The accusations are that the mother-in-law committed suicide. Learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there are materials to suggest that physical and mental torture being inflicted upon the mother-in- law. I have taken into account the post mortem report. Post-mortem report do not reflect any physical injuries being inflicted and the ground assigned for death is due to ante-mortem hanging. Having considered the overall circumstances and the case principally being charges of abetment, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioners is uncalled for. As such, prayer for anticipatory 2 bail of the petitioners namely, (1) Sampa Roy; (2) Shibu Jana and (3) Susanta @ Santanu Jana is allowed. Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer on such terms and conditions as he deems fit and proper 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As the investigation of the case is still in progress, the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 shall report to the Investigating Officer of the case within a period of ten days and thereafter, on all subsequent dates fixed by the Investigating Officer of the case for the sake of investigation till the report in final form is submitted before the jurisdictional Court. Petitioner no.1 shall make herself available as and when required by the investigating officer of the case for the sake of investigation. Accordingly, CRM (A) 3657 of 2026 is allowed. The observations made above are only restricted for adjudication of the anticipatory bail application and should not be considered a final opinion on the merits of the case. Memo of evidence submitted by the State be kept with the record. 3 All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order 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.)