Aringa Sen Biswas Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2026)

Aringa Sen Biswas Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Calcutta HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application for cancellation of bail disposed of; the existing bail order dated 23.10.2024 left undisturbed, with the Court observing that the learned Magistrate may impose conditions on a future application by the State or the de facto complainant/petitioner if supervening circumstances or post-bail conduct warrant it.

Issue for consideration

Whether the ad interim bail granted on 23.10.2024 to the accused should be cancelled.

Court's answer

The Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of bail granted on 23.10.2024, since there is no adverse report at this stage.

Key takeaways

If supervening circumstances or the post-bail conduct of the accused/opposite parties raise issues of tampering with evidence or creating impediments to the progress of the case, the learned Magistrate, on an appropriate application by the State or the de facto complainant/petitioner, would impose conditions for ensuring fair progress of the trial.obiter¶¶15
The charge-sheet having already been submitted, the Judge formed the prima facie opinion that a case has been made out for trial under the relevant provisions of BNS, 2023.obiter¶¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Calcutta High Court (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.) disposed of an application under Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for cancellation of the ad interim bail dated 23.10.2024 granted by the learned Magistrate. Noting that the charge-sheet had been submitted, that notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS had been duly served and complied with, and that there was no adverse report, the Court declined to interfere with the bail order, while observing that the learned Magistrate may impose conditions on an appropriate application by the State or the de facto complainant/petitioner if supervening circumstances or the post-bail conduct of the accused raise issues of evidence-tampering or impediment to the trial. The Court recorded its prima facie opinion that a case has been made out for trial under the relevant provisions of BNS, 2023. Background: petitioner alleged physical and mental torture by her husband and in-laws, including an assault on 18.10.2024; last date fixed was 14.05.2025 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Kalyani.

06.03.2026 Item No. M/L. 27 Ct.No.35 dc.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION

C.R.M. (SB) 155 of 2024

Aringa Sen Biswas versus State of West Bengal & Ors.

In Re : An Application for cancellation of bail under Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Mr. Kunal Ganguly … For the State.

None appears for the petitioner.

Learned advocate for the State is present.

Petitioner has prayed for cancellation of bail.

State has produced the case diary.

The fact of the case reflects that petitioner was married to one Dinesh Sen about 15 years prior to the institution of the FIR and out of the wedlock, a female child was born. Petitioner was subjected to torture both physically and mentally by her husband and in-laws and there is emphasis of an incident on 18.10.2024 when she was assaulted by her husband and brother-in-law at about 20.00 hrs.

State has submitted a report which reflects that charge-sheet was submitted. Case diary reflects that there were injuries which were sustained by the present petitioner. As charge-sheet has already been submitted, prima facie , I am of the opinion that a case has been made out for trial under the relevant provisions of BNS, 2023. The report also reflects that lastly date was fixed on 14.05.2025 for

2

appearance before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 2^nd Court, Kalyani. The subject-matter of the case relates to order of interim bail dated 23.10.2024. It reflects that notice was issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS by the investigating officer of the case and the same was complied with. As such, the learned Magistrate on consideration of the materials was pleased to grant ad interim bail.

Having taken into consideration that the bail was granted on 23.10.2024 and there is no adverse report, at this stage, I am not inclined to interfere with the order of bail. However, if there are supervening circumstances or the post bail conduct of the accused/opposite parties which raise issues relating to tampering of the evidence of the case or creating impediment for progress of the case, under such circumstances, the learned Magistrate on an appropriate application by the State or the de facto complainant/petitioner would impose conditions for ensuring fair progress of the trial.

Report submitted by the learned advocate for the State be kept with the record.

Case diary be returned to the learned advocate for the

State.

With the aforesaid observations, the application for cancellation of bail being CRM (SB) 155 of 2024 is disposed of.

3

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

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

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)