Anuska Raj @ Anushka Raj v. The State Of West Bengal

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION 01.07.2025 Sl. No.14 Court No.3 Ali Allowed C.R.M. (A) 433 of 2025 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Bhaktinagar Police Station Case No. 187 of 2025 dated 26.02.2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

And In the matter of: Anuska Raj @ Anushka Raj ...petitioner Dr. Arjun Chowdhury, Ms. Sanaya Parveen, Ms. Riya Agarwal, Mr. mantu Mondal, Mr. Bappaditya Roy .....For the Petitioner.

Mr. Debjit Kundu, ...for the de-facto complainant.

Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Ld. APP Mr. Kallol Nag ........For the State.

This is an application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner apprehending arrest in connection with Bhaktinagar Police Station Case No. 187 of 2025 dated 26.02.2025 under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, has filed this application for anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant FIR was lodged after 10 (ten) days of death of the deceased. It is the fact that there are relations between the deceased with the present petitioner but the deceased has committed suicide due to her financial loss in running a

restaurant. He further submits that the present petitioner always cooperated with investigating agency, the petitioner has brought the deceased to the hospital and she informed the relatives of the deceased after the incident. So, he prayed for bail in any condition. Petitioner being a student of Law in a College was not available with the investigating agency during the period of her examination now she can cooperate the investigating agency in all respect.

Learned PP raised strong objection and submits that there are allegations against the present petitioner, the allegations are substantiated by the statement of available witnesses. The post-mortem report has been collected by the investigating agency. At this juncture, the bail prayer of the present petitioner cannot be considered.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties also considering the postmortem report wherein death was caused due to effect of ante mortem hanging. Moreover, as the petitioner has fairly submitted her relationship with the deceased and as she was there at the hospital and informed the relatives of the deceased after the incident. Considering the circumstances and the nature of the offence alleged against the present petitioner, it appears to this Court that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary; the present petitioner is entitled to get a favourable order. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is considered and allowed.

Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, namely, Anuska Raj @ Anushka Raj be released on bail

upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each, with two registered sureties of like amount each, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri on condition that the petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer once in a week until further order and shall also comply with the provisions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of. Parties to act upon the server copy and urgent certified copy of this order be provided on usual terms and conditions. (Subhendu Samanta, J.)