14.10.2026 Sl. No. 12 Court No.550 Rohan (Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.(M) 2353 of 2026 In Re: An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Ranitala Police Station Case No. 108 of 2026 dated 04.03.2026 under Sections 80/85/103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. -And- In the matter of: Mehebub Hasan …Petitioner Mr. Usof Ali Dewan Mr. Asif Dewan Mr. Mehedi Masud …for the Petitioner Mr. Kallol Mondal, PP Mr. Aditya Tiwari Ms. Namrata Chatterjee … for the State 1. Report submitted by the learned counsel for the State is kept with the record. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with his parents drove out the victim 4 months back from the matrimonial home. The victim committed suicide in her paternal home and the petitioner never visited his father-in-law’s house on the relevant date. As the investigation is complete and the petitioner is in custody for more than 7 months and the other accused persons were granted anticipatory bail, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail on any condition. 2 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. According to her, the accused persons who were granted anticipatory bail were not in the same footing as the present petitioner. She has drawn the attention of this Court to several statements recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS. According to her, there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioner and as such, the prayer for bail of the petitioner should be rejected. 4. I have gone through the materials on record. It appears that the petitioner is in custody for more than 7 months. It further appears that there are no materials to show excepting the oral statement of the witnesses that the petitioner visited the house. There are no eye-witnesses that the petitioner administered poison upon the victim. Considering the period of detention and also the fact that there is no chance of an early conclusion of the trial, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail on certain conditions. 5. Accordingly, the application for bail of the petitioner, namely, Mehebub Hasan is allowed. 6. I direct the petitioner will be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each, one of whom must be a local, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lalbagh, Murshidabad. The petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every day of substantive hearing subject to the provisions of Section 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 355 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and shall not 3 intimidate the witnesses and/or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever. The petitioner shall remain remain within the geographical limits of the district of Murshidabad and shall meet the Inspector-in-Charge of the Lalbagh Police Station once in a week until further order. 7. In the event, the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions as stated above, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel his bail in accordance with law without further reference to this Court. 8. Thus, the application for bail being C.R.M. (M) 2353 of 2026 stands disposed of. 9. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble Court. 10. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Apurba Sinha Ray, J.)