Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/2045/2026 of XXXXX Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 9 October 2026
ct 33 C.R.M.(M) No. 2045 of 2026 sl no. 25 cm/sdas In Re : In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Domkal P.S. Case No. 651 of 2025 dated 30.07.2025. Sections 85/80(2)/70(1)/103(1)/61(2)/238( a )/66 of the Bharatiya
09.10.2026
ct 33
C.R.M.(M) No. 2045 of 2026
sl no. 25
cm/sdas
In Re : In Re : An application for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Domkal P.S. Case No.
of dated
30.07.2025.
Sections
85/80(2)/70(1)/103(1)/61(2)/238(a)/66 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
And
Rejected
In Re : xxxxxxxx
….. petitioner
Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das
Ms. Deblina De
…… for the petitioner
Mr. Kalidas Saha
Mr. Uttam Basak
…… for the State
Ms. Suveni Banerjee
…… for the de facto complainant
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The learned Advocate representing the petitioner submitted that the co-accused of the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the victim had been granted bail by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court. The present accused is in cusotdy since one year and two months after being arrested on 31st July, 2025. Since the charge-sheet in the instant case has been submitted and the charge has not been framed and recording of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses being remote, the petitioner is entitled to grant bail.
2. The learned advocate representing the State opposed the submissions of the learned Advocate representing the petitioner stressing that the present petitioner being the father-in-law of the deceased victim and the mother-in- law had been actively involved in the alleged offence. Mother-in-law is still absconding. FSL report is yet to be received. There are statements recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS wherein it transpires that the victim within two years of her marriage had been brutally assaulted and tortured mentally on several grounds which compelled her to return to her father’s home. She was convinced to return to her maternal house and within two years of such return the victim had been raped and thereafter murdered.
3. Considering the narrative of the complaint and submissions recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS and gravity and gruesome nature of the offence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
4. Accordingly, the application being CRM(M) 2045 of 2026 is dismissed.
(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)