Jayanti Das And ANR v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR

11.03.2024 Item No.21 Ct. No. 29 CHC Rejected C.R.M.(A) 857 of 2024 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Mejia Police Station Case No. 94 of 2023 dated 15.10.2023 under Sections 376/417/120B/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. And In the matter of : Jayanti Das & anr.

...... petitioners Mr. Susnigdho Bhattacharyya, Ms. Bidisha Chakraborty ....for the petitioners Mr. Sekhar Barman ....for the State Mr. Sujoy Sarkar ....for the de facto complainant Petitioners pray for anticipatory bail.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that, petitioners are the married sister-in-law and the mother of the victim.

Learned advocate appearing for the State draws the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Learned advocate appearing for the de facto complainant submits that, subsequent to the present police complaint, de facto complainant lodged another police complaint with regard Signed By :

CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY High Court of Calcutta 11 th of March 2024 06:33:08 PM

to assault on her, by the principal accused and the petitioners herein, amongst others in order to force the de facto complainant to withdraw the present police complaint. Statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the victim squarely implicate both the petitioners before us.

The principal accused is still at large.

Role of the petitioners require investigation. Enlarging any of the petitioners on anticipatory bail will be inimical to such investigation.

Consequently, we are unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. CRM(A) 857 of 2024 is disposed of.

(Debangsu Basak, J.) (Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.)