SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Of The Dowry Prohibition Act vs In Re : Anil Bagdi & Ors on 17 December, 2019



C.R.M. 11927 of 2019

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure filed on 16.12.2019 in connection with
Sainthia Police Station Case No. 121 of 2019 dated 04.04.2019 under
Sections 498A/Section304B/Section306/Section34 of the Indian Penal Code an Sections 3/Section4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act.


In Re : Anil Bagdi Ors. …… petitioners

Mr. Ranjan Chakrabarti
…..for the petitioners

Mr. Arijit Ganguly,
Mr. Avik Ghatak
….for the State

It is submitted by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners

that there was a love affair between the victim lady and her husband

prior to their marriage. Subsequently they married and owing to

grievance against her husband victim committed suicide. Petitioners are

the in-laws of the victim housewife and have been falsely implicated in

the instant case.

Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for

anticipatory bail.

We have considered the materials on record including the suicide

note of the victim. Grievance of the victim is essentially against her

husband. There is no reference to any cruelty upon her over demand of

dowry. Keeping in mind the extent of complicity of the petitioners in the

instant case and as husband of the victim has been enlarged on regular

bail, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them.

Accordingly, we direct that in the event of arrest the petitioners

shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each,

with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of the arresting

officer and also be subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and on condition that

they shall appear before the court below and pray for regular bail within

a period of four weeks from date.

This application for anticipatory bail is, thus, allowed.

(Suvra Ghosh, 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Your email address will not be published.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