Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3073/2026 of SUMITRA RAKSHIT AND ANR. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 29 September 2026
29.09.2026 Rohit, A.R.(Ct.) ct.no.35 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M ( A ) 3073 of 2026 Sumitra Rakshit & Anr. Vs The State of West Bengal In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
D/L 33
29.09.2026
Rohit, A.R.(Ct.)
ct.no.35
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M (A) 3073 of 2026
Sumitra Rakshit & Anr.
Vs
The State of West Bengal
In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 arising out of Domjur Police Station Case No. 519 of 2026 dated 17.07.2026 under Sections 318(4)/316(2)/61(2) of the B.N.S, 2023.
And
In the matter of : 1. Sumitra Rakshit
2. Shreya Rakshit
……Petitioners.
Mr. Aliul Islam
…for the Petitioners
Mr. Debajyoti Deb
Ms. Rima Banerjee
…for the State
Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhuri
…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. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the principal accused being the husband of the petitioner no. 1 and father of the petitioner no. 2 was arrested and subsequently released on bail.
2. Learned Advocate for the State as well as for the de facto complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
3. I have taken into account the objection of the State particularly that gold has not been recovered. Prima facie, it reflects that the accused and the informant both are jewellery shop owners. Having regard to the same and the fact that the petitioners before this Court are ladies I am of the opinion their custodial detention may not be warranted. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed.
4. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners, namely, 1. Sumitra Rakshit 2. Shreya Rakshit be released on bail by the Investigating Officer/arresting officer of the case on such terms and conditions as it deems fit and proper. This would be subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. As the investigation of the case is in progress, petitioners shall make themselves available before the Investigating Officer within a period of ten days from the date of the order and shall subsequently follow the Investigating Officer as and when called for till the report in final form is submitted before the jurisdictional Court.
6. Accordingly, CRM (A) 3073 of 2026 is allowed.
7. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
8. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the Official website of this Court.
9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)