Allowed

Bozlur Rahaman & Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC2 Mar 2021CRM/1964/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners, husband and wife, accused under Sections 498A/307 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Relying on the recovery of stridhan articles, the Court held detaining them warranted. They were ordered to execute a bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two local sureties upon arrest.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties of like amount.

Bozlur Rahaman & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal — Domestic Violence | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

02.03.2021 Item no.136 Court No.28 Avijit Mitra

¶2

C.R.M.1964 of 2020 (through video conference)

¶3

with

¶4

CRAN 1 of 2020 (Old CRAN No.4039 of 2020) (not here)

¶5

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed in connection with Khargram Police Station Case No.44 of 2020 dated 05.02.2020 under Sections 498A/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act;

¶6

And

¶7

In Re : Bozlur Rahaman & anr.

¶8

…. petitioners

¶9

Mr. Prasenjit Mukherjee, Mr. Argha Kamal Das ….for the petitioners Ms. Faria Hossain, Ms. Baisali Basu

¶10

…… for the State

¶11

The supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioners be kept with the record.

¶12

Learned advocate appearing for the State also submits a report, let the same be also kept with the record. The petitioner no.1 happens to be the husband of the de facto complainant and the petitioner no.2 is allegedly the second wife of the husband.

¶13

The report reflects that pursuant to the earlier order dated 14^th December, 2020, the stridhan articles have been recovered and the de facto complainant has received back the same.

¶14

Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the fact that the stridhan articles have already been recovered, we are of the opinion that custodial detention of the petitioners may not be warranted in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

¶15

Accordingly the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.

¶16

¶17

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners, namely, Bozlur Rahaman and Nasima Mamtaj , shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶18

Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail being CRM No.1964 of 2020, is disposed of.

¶19

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)

Bozlur Rahaman & Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bozlur Rahaman & Anr. v. State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hafijul Ali Vs State of West Bengal

Alamgir Sardar Vs State of West Bengal

Alamgir Mallik@Md Alamgir Mullick Vs State of West Bengal

Shabaj Alam@Sk Shahbaz Anwar and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal

MD Lutfar Rahaman Vs State of West Bengal

Nonigopal Bapari @ Pagla Vs State of West Bengal