Pulin Hawladar@Kunil Hawaladar And ANR v. State Of West Bengal

30.09.2022 SL 40 Dd Allowed CRM (A) 4765 of 2022 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Tehatta Police Station Case No. 452 of 2021 dated 07.09.2021 under Sections 498A/325/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. And In Re : Pulin Hawladar @ Kunil Hawladar & Anr. . ..... petitioners Mr. Asraf Mandal ...for the petitioners Mr. Tanmay Kr. Ghosh, Mr. Arindam Sen, ....for the State We have considered the materials on record. Petitioners are the parents-in-laws of the victim housewife. They pray for anticipatory bail.

Learned lawyer for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

We have considered the materials on record. Allegation of attempt to suffocate the housewife is against the husband who has been granted regular bail. Injuries from the medical papers do not appear to be grievous or life threatening. Keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioners in the alleged crime and as the investigations are complete, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners 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 arresting officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on condition that the petitioners shall appear before the court below and pray for regular bail within a period of four weeks from date.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed. (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)