The Kolkata High Court rejected an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC filed by in-laws of a de facto complainant. The court denied bail due to the gravity of the offences involving alleged torture and poison, citing corroborative statements in the case diary.
Anticipatory bail application rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
03.04.2023
4 Ct. No. 29 CHC Rejected
C.R.M.(A) 1210 of 2023
In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Sonamukhi Police Station Case No. 174 of 2022 dated 14.11.2022 under Sections 498A/307/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
And
In the matter of : Habal Chandra Pal & anr.
...… petitioners
Mr. Monish Sen, Ms. Oisani Mukherjee .…for the petitioners
Mr. Pravas Bhattacharya, Mirza Firoj Ahmed Begg .…for the State
The in-laws of the de facto complainant are before us in this application for anticipatory bail.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the husband surrendered and was taken into custody by the jurisdictional Court. She submits that the police complaint was lodged eight months after the alleged incident.
Learned advocate appearing for the State draws attention of the Court to the materials in the case diary including the statement of the de facto complainant recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as the statement of neighbour recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code thereof. The de facto complainant in her
2
statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code narrates an incident of she being made to consume poison forcefully. She speaks of torture being meted out by the present petitioners also. The claim of the de facto complainant that the present petitioners also used to torture her is corroborated by statement recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code of neighbours of the matrimonial home of the de facto complainant.
In view of the gravity of the offence and the complicity of the petitioners as appearing from the materials in the case diary, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
CRM (A) 1210 of 2023 is rejected.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
(Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in connection with offences under Sections 498A, 307, 406, 34 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Habal Chandra Pal & anr.
State of West Bengal
Debangsu Basak
Md. Shabbar Rashidi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
