Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3383/2026 of PETITIONER NO 1 AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 8 October 2026
DL-62 Court No.37 [Bench ID-265691] (AD) (Rejected) In the High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M. ( A ) 3383 of 2026 In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to
08.10.2026
DL-62
Court No.37
[Bench ID-265691]
(AD)
(Rejected)
In the High Court at Calcutta
Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
C.R.M. (A) 3383 of 2026
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of
the
Bharatiya
Nagarik
Suraksha
Sanhita, corresponding to Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Salboni Police Station Case No.111 of 2026 dated 22.05.2026 under Sections 85/103/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 vide G.R. Case No.1502 of 2026, Charge Sheet No.184 of 2026 dated 17.08.2026 under Sections 80/85/103(1)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Sections 6 and 17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and Sections 9 and 10 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, pending before the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Paschim Medinipur.
And
In the matter of: XXXX & Anr.
….petitioners
Mr. Sujan Chatterjee, Advocate
Mr. Neel Chakraborty, Advocate
…for the petitioners
Mr. Kallol Mondal, Ld. PP
Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Ld. Jr. Govt. Advocate Ms. Namrata Chatterjee, Advocate
… for the State
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. Memo of evidence filed in Court be taken on record.
2. Petitioners seek anticipatory bail.
3. Neighbours’ statements implicate the petitioners in holding out both physical and mental torture upon the victim.
4. Apparently, the victim committed suicide.
5. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners refers the medical documents of the victim and submits that, the victim was suffering from a medical condition wherein the victim possessed suicidal thoughts.
6. Simply because the victim was with the medical condition as claimed on behalf of the petitioners does not mean that the petitioners were not guilty of meting out physical and mental torture as recorded by the neighbours.
7. Considering the gravity of the offence and the involvement of the petitioners in the incident, I am unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.
9. C.R.M. (A) 3383 of 2026 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
ABHIJIT DAS Digitally signed by ABHIJIT DAS Date: 2026.10.09 11:29:17 +05'30'