Srabanti Debnath & Anr. vs State Of W. B.

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 videoconference on the basis of such undertaking.

The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is the sister-in-law and the petitioner no.2 is the

husband of the sister-in-law.

According to the learned advocate for the petitioners the allegations so made are general in nature and the petitioners have been residing at a separate

place which had no connection with the alleged occurrence.Â

He further draws our attention to paragraph 5 of the application which reflects that the husband has already been granted bail.

The learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the victim was subjected to such torture that she had to undergo

operation. To that effect the learned advocate for the petitioners have filed additional documents which reflect that the operation was carried out in

Government hospital.

Having taken into account the memo of evidence and the fact that in connection with this case the husband is already in custody, we do not consider

that the custodial detention of the petitioners are required for the sake of investigation of the case.

The prayer for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of the petitioners are allowed.

Accordingly, in the event of arrest each of the petitioners shall furnish bond of Rs.10,000/- by way of local surety to the satisfaction of the Arresting

Officer subject to condition that they would not tamper the evidence and/or intimidate the witnesses associated with the case.

The provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr. P. C. would apply in this case and this order of anticipatory bail would be valid for a period of four months.

Accordingly, CRM 4148 of 2020 and CRAN 2351 of 2020 are allowed.