Dismissed¶13

Ramjan Ali and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Calcutta HC7 Jan 2026CRM(A)/3/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri; C.R.M. (A) 3 of 2026; anticipatory bail; Section 482 BNSS 2023; Sections 85/109 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; Falakata Police Station Case No. 476 of 2025 dated 29.09.2025; cruelty/offence against in-laws of victim; victim statement under Section 183 BNSS; case diary, injury reports, doctor's statement; complicity of in-laws; bail prayer rejected; application dismissed; Tirthankar Ghosh, J.; decided 07.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Considering the totality of circumstances, although the victim exonerated one of the in-laws while implicating the rest, there is logic behind the complicity involved in the prosecution case so far as the present petitioners are concerned. ¶12

Ramjan Ali and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal — Dowry and Cruelty | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

07.01.2026

¶2

Item No.48 Ct.No.3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI

¶4

dc. Rejected

¶5

C.R.M. (A) 3 of 2026

¶6

In Re : An Application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed in connection with Falakata Police Station Case No. 476 of 2025 dated 29.09.2025 under Sections 85/109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶7

And In Re : Ramjan Ali and others ... Petitioners. Mr. Hillol Saha Podder ... For the Petitioners. Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee, Mr. Chattu Roy ... For the State.

¶8

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is the father-in-law, petitioner no.2 is the elder brother-in-law, petitioner no.3 is the sister-in-law (wife of petitioner no.2) and petitioner no.4 is the sister-in-law (wife of another brother-in-law) of the victim.

¶9

Learned advocate appearing for the State has produced the case diary and drawn the attention of the Court to various injury reports including the statement of doctor as also the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS.

¶10

Having considered the totality of the circumstances and the fact that at the same breath, the victim has also

¶11

¶12

exonerated one of the in-laws while implicating rest of the inlaws, there is logic behind the complicity involved in the prosecution case so far as the present petitioners are concerned. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting privilege of anticipatory bail to the present petitioners. Consequently, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected .

¶13

The application for anticipatory bail, being CRM (A) 3 of 2026, is, thus, dismissed.

¶14

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

¶15

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶16

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)

Ramjan Ali and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramjan Ali and Ors. v. the State of West Bengal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Prasad Sah Vs the State of West Bengal

Kunal Sah and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Tushta Sarkar and Anr. Vs the State of West Bengal

Sagram Hemram@Shegram Hemram@Hembram and Ors. Vs the State of West Bengal

Kush Mandal Vs the State of West Bengal

Md.Mobarak Vs the State of West Bengal