Gopal Khatua Vs State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2026)

Gopal Khatua Vs State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, release on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one of whom must be local) to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions of Section 438 CrPC / Section 482 BNSS and further conditions to cooperate with the investigation, not threaten or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence, and meet the Investigating Officer once a week until submission of the report in final form.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in FIR being Debra PS Case No.43/2026 dated 27.01.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/82(1)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023, is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), i.e., whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required.

Court's answer

Considering the materials available in the case diary and the fact that the petitioner wants to stay with the victim as husband and wife (and his undertaking to abstain from improper conduct/cruelty), custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and the Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, the petitioner is to be released on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), subject to the conditions under Section 438 CrPC / Section 482 BNSS and further conditions that he cooperate with the investigation, not threaten or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence, and meet the Investigating Officer once a week until submission of the report in final form.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted (Jay Sengupta, J.). Gopal Khatua, husband of the de facto complainant, sought pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) in connection with Debra PS Case No.43/2026 dated 27.01.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/82(1)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023. The FIR was said to have been lodged after 17 years of marriage on a mistaken suspicion of an extra-marital affair; the complainant alleged post-FIR torture, and the State relied on witness statements including that of the son of the alleged victim. Considering the case diary and the petitioner's undertaking to abstain from cruelty and stay together peacefully with his wife, the Court held that custodial interrogation was not required and granted anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each (one local), subject to Section 438/482 conditions, cooperation with investigation, non-intimidation of witnesses and non-tampering with evidence, and a weekly meeting with the Investigating Officer till submission of the final report. Application disposed of.

07.04.2026 Sl. No.45 Ct. 28 NB

C.R.M (A) 1062 of 2026

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Debra PS Case No.43/2026 dated 27.01.2026 under Sections 85/115(2)/82(1)/351(2) of the BNS, 2023.

And

In the matter of: Gopal Khatua … petitioner

Mr. Sourav Paul. …for the petitioner.

Ms. Sujata Das, Mr. Abhinaba Mukherjee. …for the State.

Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati, Ms. Swastika Chowdhury, Ms. K. Kubra, Ms. Ilika Nag, Mr. Avijit Chatterjee. …for the de facto complainant.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the husband of the de facto complainant. The FIR was lodged after 17 years of marriage. It has been lodged on a mistaken suspicion that the petitioner was having an extra marital affair.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the de facto complainant strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that even after registration of the FIR, the victim has been tortured by the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He relies on the

2

statements of witnesses including that of the son of the alleged victim.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner undertakes not to behave in an improper manner or commit any act of cruelty towards his wife and stay together peacefully.

Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the fact that the petitioner wants to stay with the victim as husband and wife, I do not think that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in this case and I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, corresponding to Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and on further condition that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall not threaten or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence in any manner whatsoever and the petitioner shall meet the Investigating Officer once a week till submission of report in final form.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

3