Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3099/2026 of RUMALI BIBI @ RUMELA BIBI AND ORS Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 29 September 2026
- 58 Court No.35 Rohan (Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.( A ) 3099 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Tapan Police Station Case No.
29.09.2026
Sl. No. - 58
Court No.35
Rohan
(Allowed)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(A) 3099 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Tapan Police Station Case No. 618 of 2025
dated 04.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/313/314/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
-And-
In the matter of: Rumali Bibi @ Rumela Bibi & Ors.
…Petitioners
Mr. Amitabha Ghosh
Ms. Arpita Paul Biswas
Mr. Buddhadeb Chatterjee
…for the Petitioners
Mr. Brajesh Jha, APP
Mr. Prantik Sarkar
Mr. Neel Chakraborty
…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. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner No. 1 is the mother-in-law, petitioner No. 2 is the father-in-law, petitioner No. 3 is the married sister-in-law and petitioner No. 4 is the husband of the petitioner No. 3.
2. Marriage was solemnized 6 years prior to the date of the incident. So far as the issue relating to miscarriage is concerned, learned advocate denies the same and submits that the same is not to the knowledge of the present petitioners. It has also been contended that the husband of the informant has already been taken into custody since more than three months.
3. I have taken into account the medical documents which are of the year 2019.
2
4. Having considered that the husband has already been arrested, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioners are unwarranted.
5. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, namely, Rumali Bibi @ Rumela Bibi, Nakamuddin Biswas, Jinnatun Bibi and Abdul Bari is allowed.
6. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners 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.
7. The petitioners shall make themselves available as and when required by the Investigating Officer of the case.
8. Alternatively, in the event charge-sheet has already been submitted before the learned Jurisdictional Court this order of anticipatory bail would be valid for a period of six weeks.
9. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M. (A) 3099 of 2026 is disposed of.
10. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
11. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
12. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)