Allowed

Lutfal Hossain and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC27 Aug 2026CRM (A)/2327/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to two petitioners facing domestic violence and related charges but rejects the prayer for the remaining petitioner who is the husband of the complainant and faces specific incriminating materials in the case diary.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners 2 and 3 to be released on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 each and subject to conditions; prayer for petitioner 1 rejected.

Lutfal Hossain and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr. — Domestic Violence | Calcutta HC (2026)

¶1

27.08.2026 Sl. No.18 Ct. 446/tkm

¶2

C. R. M. (A) 2327 of 2026

¶3

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Harishchandrapur Police Station Case No.362 of 2026 dated 09.04.2026 under sections 85/109/123 of the BNS 2023 and section 4 of the DP Act

¶4

And In Re: Lutfal Hossain & Ors. … … Petitioners

¶5

Allowed

¶6

Mr. A R Pati Mr. Ashok Halder Ms. Reshmi Mukherje Mr. Avijit Chatterjee … … for the petitioners Mr. Subhasish Pachhal Mr. Arka Naha … … for the State Mr. Souvik Dey Mr. Saiful Alam … … for the de facto complainant

¶7

Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the present case has been registered on the basis of a complaint lodged before the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS. He submits that there is a delay of five months in lodging the FIR. He submits that, following a matrimonial dispute between the victim and petitioner no. 1, the victim started living separately at her parental house and thereafter, suddenly, the present complaint was lodged, which is an afterthought. He further submits that the injury report does not lend any support to the prosecution case. He prays for pre arrest bail.

¶8

Learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary, memo of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned Advocate for the de facto complainant also opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶10

¶11

Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials in the case diary, including the injury report. It prima facie appears that the main allegation is directed against petitioner no. 1, who happens to be the husband of the complainant, whereas the allegations against petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are omnibus in nature. There is no allegation of any specific overt act against petitioner nos. 2 and 3. Hence, the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of petitioner nos. 2 and 3. However, certain incriminating materials are available in the case diary against petitioner no. 1. Accordingly, the prayer made by petitioner no. 1 is rejected.

¶12

Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 viz. Jarina Bibi and Hamidul Rahaman @ Hamedur Rahaman shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM Chanchal Malda and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.

¶13

The application being CRM (A) 2327 of 2026 is disposed of.

¶14

(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)

Lutfal Hossain and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lutfal Hossain and Ors. 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