Dilrubi Khatun @ Mst Dilrubi Khatun v. State Of West Bengal

10.04.2026 Sl. No.47 Ct. 28 NB C.R.M (A) 782 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 Raninagar PS Case No.834/2025 dated 18.12.2025 under Sections 318(4) of the BNS, 2023.

And In the matter of: Dilrubi Khatun @ Mst Dilrubi Khatun ... petitioner Mr. Tapodip Gupta, Mr. Suman Bhanja, Mr. Golam Ahammed.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Ranadeb Sengupta, Ms. Madhumita Basak.

...for the State.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. The petitioner is the widow of an army personnel. She got an LPG distributorship after her husband died. It is alleged that the petitioner had employed the husband of the de facto complainant in the business and later on asked him to invest Rs.37Lakhs in the business on the promise of profit sharing. It is also alleged that when the de facto complainant's husband demanded repayment, he was ousted from the business and no repayment was made. In a writ petition filed by the husband of the de facto complainant he admitted that he had received a sum of Rs. 10,50,000/- out of a settled sum of Rs.18Lakhs. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He submits that, as per the de facto complainant, in a salish that took place earlier, a sum

of Rs.27Lakhs was agreed to be paid by the petitioner to the de facto complainant's husband. Later on, the petitioner was allegedly forced to accept Rs.18Lakhs as the settled amount in another salish. However, as per the de facto complainant, only a part of that sum has been paid and according to the husband, nothing has been paid.

Considering the above, the other materials available in the case diary and the fact that the allegations also have a civil profile, 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. 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.)