SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Case No. 5535 Of 2017) vs In Re: Anjuara Bibi & Ors on 10 May, 2018



Sl. No.193
C. R. M. 1907 of 2018

In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure filed on 03.05.2018 in connection with Bamongola Police Station Case No. 275
of 2017 dated 19.12.2017 under Sections 498A/304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. (G.R.
Case No. 5535 of 2017)


In Re: Anjuara Bibi Ors.

… … Petitioners
Mr. Kallol Mondal .. Advocate
Ms. Amrita Chel .. Advocate
… … for the petitioners

Mrs. Kakali Chatterjee .. Advocate
… … for the State

Heard the learned advocate appearing for both the parties.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they are the in-laws of the victim-

housewife and did not play any role in the matrimonial life of the couple. It is further

submitted that the petitioner no.3 is the married sister-in-law and did not reside in the

matrimonial home of the victim-housewife at all.

Learned advocate for the State produces the case diary and opposes the prayer

for anticipatory bail.

We have considered the materials in the case diary and we find prima facie

involvement of the petitioner nos.1 2 who resided with the couple in subjecting the

housewife to torture resulting in her unnatural death within seven years of her marriage.

In view of the prima facie involvement of the petitioner nos.1 2 in the alleged

crime, we are not inclined in granting anticipatory bail to the accused/petitioner nos.1 2.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the accused/petitioner nos.1 2

namely, (1) Anjuara Bibi (2) Saruk Rahaman @ Sarukhan Rahaman @ Saruk Khan

Rahaman is rejected.

However, keeping in mind the extent of involvement of the petitioner no.3 who

resided separately from the matrimonial home of the victim-housewife, we are of the

opinion that custodial interrogation of the accused/petitioner no.3 is not necessary in the

facts of the present case and she may be granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the accused/petitioner no.3,

namely (3) Beauty Bibi, be released on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

Ten thousand only), with two sureties of like amount, to the satisfaction of the arresting

officer and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.

(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation