Shantibala Barman v. The State Of West Bengal

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction 19.08.2025.

Appellate Side Suman Ct. 01 Allowed CRM (A) 586 of 2025 In re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mathabhanga Police Station case no.179 of 2025 dated 12.03.2025 under Sections 137(2)/140(3)/49 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and corresponding to G.R. Case No.372 of 2025 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathabhanga.

And In the matter of :Shantibala Barman ... petitioners Mr. Sudip Guha ..for the petitioner Mr. Tapan Bhattacharjee Mr. Dhiman Sil ..for the State The petitioner appears to be the mother-in-law of the de facto complainant.

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

It appears that the alleged incident took place after approximately eleven years of marriage.

Having regard to the nature of the allegations made in the FIR, and the extent of improvement of the petitioner as appears from the statement recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Investigating Agency, I

am of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted in the present case. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed. The petitioner, namely Shantibala Barman, in the event of her arrest, shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of ₹5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathabhanga. The grant of bail shall be subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), and further on the condition that the petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional court on each and every date fixed for the appearance of the accused.

In the event of any default in appearance, the jurisdictional court shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps to secure the petitioner's presence, including cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted herein, without further reference to this Court.

Accordingly, CRM (A) 586 of 2025 stands disposed of. Let an urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocates for the parties on the usual undertakings.

(Kausik Chanda, J.)