Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
An Application For Anticipatory Bail vs Basu Chatterjee & Others on 27 June, 2016
Author: Patherya
Bench: Patherya
1
27. 06 .2016 C.R.M. 3543 of 2016.
ALLOWED
In the matter of An application for anticipatory bail
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed
on 11th May, 2016 in connection with Titagarh Police
Station Case No. 296 of 2016 dated 3.5.2016 under
Sections 498A/323/325/406/506/120B/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and adding Section 3 and 4 of the D.P.
Act.
And
In the matter of : Basu Chatterjee & Others
... Petitioners
Mr. Prabir Mitra
Mr. Sambhunath De
.. for the Petitioners
Mr. Debojyoti Deb
.. For the State
Apprehending arrest in connection with
Titagarh Police Station Case No. 296 of 2016 dated
3.5.2016 under Sections
498A/323/325/406/506/120B/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and adding Section 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act, this
application for anticipatory bail has been filed
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
Learned Advocate for the petitioners
submits that the petitioner no. 1 is the husband
of the de-facto complainant and the petitioner
2
Nos. 2,4 and 6 are the married sisters-in-law and
the remaining petitioners are the husbands of
the sisters-in-law. The learned Advocate for the
petitioners further submits that the de-facto
complainant voluntarily left the house of her
husband and thereafter the petitioner no. 1 has
filed a case for divorce being Mat. Suit No. 596 of
2016 in order to dissolve the marital life. The de-
facto complainant in retaliation to that has filed
the instant criminal case in order to put the
petitioners behind the bar.
Learned Advocate for the State takes us
through the case diary and submits that notices
under Section 41A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure could not even be served since the
petitioners are not residing in the address given
in the F.I.R. The learned Advocate for the State
draws our attention to the statements of the
witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the
3
Code of Criminal Procedure at pages 9,10 ,11
and 12 of the case diary.
Having considered the submissions of the
parties and on scrutiny of the case diary and
considering the facts and circumstances of this
case, we are of the considered view that custodial
interrogation of the petitioners will not be
required for further effective investigation in this
case subject to handing over "Stridhan"
properties to the de-facto complainant by the
petitioner no. 1. Thus, we direct that the
petitioners, namely, Basu Chatterjee, Rina
Chatterjee, Shampa Bagchi (Chatterjee), Rintu
Bagchi , Rita Bhattacharya and Ramen
Bhattacharjee be released on anticipatory bail in
the event of their arrest upon furnishing bond of
Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of Rs. 2,500/-
each to the satisfaction of the arresting authority
and subject to the conditions imposed under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
4
The Investigating Officer of the concerned
police station is, accordingly, directed to take
appropriate steps with regard to "Stridhan"
properties of the de-facto complainant and the
petitioner no. 1 shall, accordingly, co-operate
with the Investigating Officer in this regard.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail
is allowed and the application is, thus, disposed
of.
Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be
given to the parties on priority basis.
( Patherya, J.)
( Debi Prosad Dey, J.
) 5