Bakitulla Mallick @ Bakitulla Mallik v. State Of West Bengal

29.10.2025 Sl. No.69 NB CRM (A) 3284 of 2025 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 Rejinagar P.S. Case No.159/2025 dated 01.06.2025 under Section 109/118/85/86 of BNS.

And In the matter of: Bakitulla Mallick @ Bakitulla Mallik ... petitioner Mr. Anit Dey.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Adil Badar, Mr. Santanu Deby Roy.

...for the State.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the father in law of the alleged victim. The marriage between the couple in question took place 4 years ago. Charge sheet has been submitted. While the sister in law was granted anticipatory bail by this Court, the application for anticipatory bail of the mother in law was rejected. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. He refers to the statements of the victim and the local witnesses as well as the injury report. According to the statement of a local witness contained at page 14 of the case diary, he was a post occurrence witness who came to the place of occurrence soon after the incident and found the victim fallen on the ground.

It appears that the present petitioner stands on the same footing as the mother in law whose application for anticipatory bail was rejected by this Court.

Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. The application for anticipatory bail being CRM (A) 3284 of 2025 is, thus, rejected.

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.)