← Library
Calcutta High CourtCRM/9500/2020partly allowed

Radharani Mandal And Others v. State Of West Bengal

2020-12-02Hon'Ble Justice Soumen Sen,Hon'Ble Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya2 pages

December 02, 2020 ARDR (Serial No. 20) CRM 9500 of 2020 (Via Video Conference) In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Santipur Police Station case no. 441 of 2020 dated 08/10/2020 under Sections 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1806.

In Re : Radharani Mandal & ors.

... petitioners Mr. Krishan Roy, Mr. Pronojit Roy, .....for the petitioners Ms. Faria Hossain, Mr. Protick Bose, ....for the State.

The petitioners undertake to affirm and stamp the petition as per the Rules within 48 hours of resumption of normal functioning of the court. The petition is taken up through video conference on the basis of such undertaking.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is the mother-in-law and the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are the brothers-in-law of the victim. It is submitted that the death occurred at the parental house and the petitioners are no way involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail. She has relied upon the statement of the daughter of the victim recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Considering the materials available on record and the nature and extent of the complicity of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offence, we are of the considered view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner no.1 is not required. Accordingly, we grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1, namely, Radharani Mandal.

Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner no. 1, namely, Radharani Mandal, shall be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties of like amount, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer subject to condition that the petitioner no.1 shall co-operate with the investigation. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner nos. 2 and 3 is rejected.

(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)