Calcutta High Court
CRM(M)/1912/2026 of SULTANA BEGUM Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 28 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L. 31. Kausik (Allowed) CRM (M) 1912 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Domjur Police Station Case No. 270 of 2022 dated 31.03.2022 under
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.
28.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 31. Kausik (Allowed)
CRM (M) 1912 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023/ Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Domjur Police Station Case No. 270 of 2022 dated 31.03.2022 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
And In the matter of : Sultana Begum
……Petitioner.
Mr. Mritunjoy Chatterjee
Mr. Arka Roy
Mr. Debarnab Adhikary
……for the Petitioner.
Ms. Arushi Rathore
Ms. Supriti Sarkhel
……for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody for 4 years and 5 months. Out of 11 witnesses cited, 3 witnesses have been examined and the petitioner has been foisted with a criminal case for murdering her husband.
State opposes the prayer for bail and emphasizes on the child witness as well as the post-mortem report along with other attending circumstances available in the case diary.
I have taken into account the fact, particularly 3 witnesses being examined out of the 11 witnesses cited and the petitioner being a lady is incarcerated for a period more than 4
2 years and 5 months. Having regard to the period of incarceration and without entering into the merits of the case, I direct the petitioner to be released on bail.
As such, petitioner, namely Sultana Begum be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of Learned CJM, Howrah.
If on bail, the petitioner shall be physically present on each and every date fixed before the learned Trial Court and shall not leave the jurisdiction of District of Howrah without the prior permission of the learned Trial Court.
Additionally, for the purposes of this case, petitioner would furnish title deed of a property in respect of the local surety referred to above.
With the aforesaid observations CRM (M) 1912 of 2026 is allowed.
All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)