Rashida Khanam @ Jui Bibi And ANR. v. State Of West Bengal

22.11.2019.

99.

as (Allowed).

C.R.M. 10912 of 2019 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 18.11.2019 in connection with Dinhata P. S. Case No.344 of 2019 dated 12.08.2019 under Sections 498A/302/120B of the Indian Penal Code. In the matter of : Rashida Khanam @ Jui Bibi & Anr. ... Petitioners.

Mr. Sayan De, Ms. Srimoyee Mukherjee.

...for the Petitioners.

Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, ld. P.P., Mr. Aniket Mitra.

.....for the State.

Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are the married sister-in-law and the mother-in-law respectively of the victim housewife and did not ordinarily reside at the matrimonial home of the victim housewife. In fact, petitioner no.2 i.e. motherin-law of the victim had withdrawn from the matrimonial home protesting against the misbehaviour of her son. Learned Advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Having considered the materials on record and bearing in mind the nature of allegations and in view of the extent of

complicity of the petitioners in the alleged crime who did not ordinarily reside at the matrimonial home of the victim housewife, we are inclined in granting 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/- each with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and 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 trial court and pray for regular bail within four weeks from date. This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. (Suvra Ghosh,J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)