Dismissed

Bushra Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC15 Feb 2022CRM (SB)/8/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge application to cancel interim bail granted in a matrimonial dispute involving IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act charges. The court rejected the cancellation but imposed new conditions preventing threats and mandating a search for recovered property.

What did the court decide?

Cancellation of bail order denied; yet bail order affirmed with conditions prohibiting threat, witness tampering, and ensuring unobstructed search for streedhan.

Bushra Hossain Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

15.02.2022 Sl. No. 06 Srimanta Ct.No.42

¶2

CRM(SB)/8/2022

¶3

(Via Video Conference)

¶4

In Re : An application for cancellation of bail under Section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶5

In the matter of : Bushra Hossain

¶6

…petitioner.

¶7

Mr. Mainak Swarnakar, Adv., Md. Rehan, Adv.

¶8

Mrs. Sreeparna Das, Adv. Mr. Suman Chakraborty, Adv.

¶9

…for the petitioner. …for the State. …for the opposite party no. 2.

¶10

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept with the record.

¶11

An order of interim bail passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore on 23^rd November, 2021 is sought to be cancelled at the instance of the de facto complainant stating, inter alia , that she lodged FIR against her husband and matrimonial relations under Sections 498A/406/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶12

The main grounds for which the interim bail granted to the accused is sought to be cancelled are as follows :- (i) The accused/opposite party no. 2 is threatening the petitioner after being released on bail;

¶13

¶14

(ii) The accused has not returned all ‘streedhan’ properties belonging to the de facto complainant in spite of the notice issued by the Investigating Officer under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The Learned Advocate for the opposite party no. 2, on the other hand, has submitted two documents dated 20^th November, 2021 and 17^th January, 2022 showing recovery of ‘streedhan’ articles from the matrimonial home of the de facto complainant.

¶16

It is submitted by the Learned Advocate for the petitioner that the said articles are only a few portion of ‘streedhan’ properties practically the opposite party no. 2 is illegally holding gold ornaments and other valuables of the de facto complainant. The de facto complainant was compelled to lodge a complaint against the Investigating Officer of the case before the higher authority of Police. When ‘streedhan’ properties were recovered she was not allowed to enter into the first floor and second floor of her matrimonial home. The Investigating officer did not instruct the accused persons to open the almirah under their possession in which the gold ornaments and other valuables of the petitioner were reportedly kept.

¶17

So far as the threatening by the opposite party no. 2 to the de facto complainant, she lodged a complaint on 2^nd December, 2021. It is further found that the Investigating Officer recovered at least some of the articles belonging to the de facto complainant in view of the notice under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

Therefore, I do not find any reason to cancel the order dated 23^rd November, 2021. However, the order of bail passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall be subject to the following conditions:-

¶19

¶20

(i) The opposite party no. 2 shall not cause any threat to the de facto complainant, induce any witness on behalf of the prosecution; (ii) The opposite party no. 2 shall allow the de facto complainant with the Investigating Officer to conduct thorough search in the house of the opposite party no. 2 for recovery of 'streedhan' properties especially ornaments etc. of the de facto complainant and she will not be obstructed by the accused persons.

¶21

The instant application is, thus, disposed of with the above order.

¶22

( Bibek Chaudhuri, J. )

Bushra Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bushra Hossain v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

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

Shibsankar Das Vs State

C and E Limited Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

C and E Limited Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Anisur Rahaman Vs the State of West Bengal and Nar

Anisur Rahaman Vs the State of West Bengal and Anr.

Manaranjan Naskar Vs State of West Bengal