Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3023/2026 of PETITIONER NO. 1 AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 24 September 2026
no. 583 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court) CRM ( A ) 3023 of 2026 In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Arambagh PS Case No. 192 of 2026 dated 17th day of May, 2026 u/s 85/80/108 of the BNS read with sections 17/4/8 of the
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.
24.09.2026 Serial no. 583 [G.S.Das] Assistant Registrar (Court)
CRM (A) 3023 of 2026
In re : An Application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023/under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with Arambagh PS Case No. 192 of 2026 dated 17th day of May, 2026 u/s 85/80/108 of the BNS read with sections 17/4/8 of the POCSO Act.
-And-
In the matter of : Petitioner no.1 and Anr.
… Petitioner(s)
Mr. Niladri Sekhar Ghosh Ms. Laboni Sikdar Mr. Souvik Dey Mr. Debarshi Mukhopadhyay
… for the petitioner(s)
Mr. Indradip Das Mr. Somnath Bera
… for the State-respondent(s) Mr. Akash Dutta Mr. Anjan G.
… for the defacto-complainant
Learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the father-in-law and the mother-in-law of the deceased and they have been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case after the daughter-in-law committed suicide. There are other charges also but the admitted fact is that the deceased and son of the present petitioners were leading a conjugal life. Learned advocate for the defacto-complainant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that there was continuous torture inflicted upon the deceased which forced her to terminate her life. State also opposes the anticipatory bail and draws the attention of the court to the statement of the father of the victim under section 183 of the BNSS. I have taken into account the statement as well as the postmortem report. Having considered that the present petitioners are the parents-in-law of the deceased and the postmortem report do not reflect any physical injuries upon the person of the deceased as also the fact that the husband has been arrested, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioners are not warranted. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is Allowed. Accordingly, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners [Petitioner no.1 and Anr.] be released on anticipatory bail subject to the satisfaction of the arresting officer of the case and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As charge-sheet has already been submitted, this order of anticipatory bail will remain in force for a period of six weeks from date.
Accordingly, CRM (A) 3023 of 2026 is disposed of. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)