Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Aftab Chowdhury & Anr vs Unknown on 17 September, 2021
08. 17.09.2021
Ct.32
Tanmoy
Allowed
C.R.M. 2564 of 2021
In Re: - An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 10/03/2021 in
connection with Gangarampur Police Station Case No.
358/2020 dated 08/10/2020 under Sections 498A/304B/34
of the Indian Penal Code.
And
In the matter of: - Aftab Chowdhury & Anr.
...petitioners.
Mr. Rabilal Mitra, Ld. Sr. Adv.,
Mr. Rajit Lal Maitra
...for the petitioners.
Mr. S.G. Mukherji, Ld. P.P.,
Ms. Faria Hossain,
Mr. Aniket Mitra
...for the State.
The petitioners are the parents-in-law of the victim lady.
At the outset, learned State Advocate takes a point that
this is the second application for anticipatory bail, the first
having been rejected on December 15, 2020. The second
application is not maintainable since no change of circumstance
has been shown by the petitioners.
Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners relies on a
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Ravindra Saxena - Versus - State of Rajasthan, reported in
(2010) 1 SCC 684 and submits that an application for
anticipatory bail can be entertained by the Court at any stage
prior to the arrest of the petitioners.
We have considered the judgment. The Hon'ble Apex
Court has observed that the provisions of Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure have to be liberally interpreted and
at any stage prior to the petitioner being taken into custody, the
petitioner can approach the Court for anticipatory bail. No
restriction appears to have been put as regards the number of
times that the petitioner can approach the Court for anticipatory
bail. In the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, on the third
application made by the petitioner, the High Court had refused
to pass an order. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court granted
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
In view of the aforesaid, we are of the opinion that this
application is maintainable.
We have seen the material in the Case Diary. The main
allegations are against the husband. The allegation against the
petitioners is that they used to instigate the husband of the
victim to torture the victim lady. The husband has been granted
bail by the learned trial Court.
On an overall assessment of the material on record and
the extent of possible complicity of the petitioners in the alleged
offence and considering that charge-sheet has been submitted,
we are of the view that immediate custodial interrogation of the
petitioners may not be necessary so long as they co-operate with
further investigation, if any.
Accordingly, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, viz., 1.
Aftab Chowdhury, 2. Lilufa Chowdhury shall be released on
bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two
sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the
satisfaction of the arresting officer and shall abide by the
conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
In case the petitioners fail to adhere to any of the
conditions mentioned in Section 438(2) of the Code, the learned
Court below shall be entitled to cancel the anticipatory bail
without further reference to this Court.
The application being C.R.M. 2564 of 2021 is,
accordingly, disposed of.
All parties shall act in terms of server copy of this order
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Bivas Pattanayak, J.) (Arijit Banerjee, J.)
