CRM (A)/2216/2026 of DEB PRASAD KAMAR AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 24 August 2026

1. Ms. Gomes, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that, in the FIR, it was alleged that the victim was subjected to cruelty; however, the nature of such cruelty has not been mentioned. There is also no specific allegation against the present accused persons. She submits that the allegations are omnibus in nature. She contents in such conspectus, it would not be apposite to compel the petitioners to remain in custody. She submits that the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners.

2. Mr. Seth, learned Advocate appearing for the State produces the case diary and memorandum of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

3. The memorandum of evidence as placed is taken on record.

4. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials available on record. The nature of the allegations is omnibus, and there is no specific allegation against the petitioners. Incidentally, the alleged incident

2 occurred in the presence of direct evidence. Therefore, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the present petitioners is not warranted and the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners.

5. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

6. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, viz., (1) Deb Prasad Kamar and (2) Amrendu Kamar be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each, with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baruipur, South 24 Parganas and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

7. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)