An Application For Anticipatory … vs 1. Biswanath Mistry on 29 August, 2017

1

29.08.2017 C.R.M. 7259 of 2017
Partly ALLOWED

32 In the matter of : An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 26th July, 2017.

And
In the matter of : 1. Biswanath Mistry, 2. Dipak Mistry and

3. Manju Das @ Mistry.

s
Petitioners.

Mr. Manas Kumar Das
….. For the Petitioners.
Ms. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee
Mr. Rudradipta Nandy.
….. For the State.

Apprehending arrest in course of investigation of Kandi Police Station FIR
No. 684 of 2016 dated 05.09.2016 under sections 498A/304B/302/34 of the
Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the petitioners
(father-in-law, brother-in-law and married sister-in-law of the victim) have
applied for anticipatory bail.

Mr. Nandy, learned advocate for the State submits that even prior to
presentation of this application, the petitioner no.2 had surrendered and has
since been released on bail. Mr. Das, learned advocate for the petitioners, for
want of instructions, is unable to meet such submission.

Be that as it may, on perusal of the “memo of evidence” which is placed
before us along with the case diary, we are of the considered view that
submission of Mr. Nandy is correct.

The application for pre-arrest bail at the instance of the petitioner no.2
stands rejected.

We have looked into the case diary. It appears that after four years of
marriage, the victim met an unnatural death. Based on the contents of the post
mortem report as well as the chemical examiner’s report not finding any poison,
we are of the considered view that custodial interrogation of the petitioners 1 and
3 is not required for effective and meaningful progress of investigation of the FIR
and that they are entitled to direction, as prayed for in the application.

2

The application, thus, stands partly allowed with the direction that in the
event of arrest of the petitioners 1 and 3, they shall be released on bail upon
furnishing bond of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand) each with two sureties of
like amount each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the arresting
officer and subject to the condition as laid down in sub-section (2) of section 438
of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Debi Prosad Dey, J.) (Dipankar Datta, J.)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *