Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Prohibition Act vs In Re : Firoj @ Firoz Mondal on 22 October, 2024

22.10.2024
Ct. No. 08

A.R.D.R./ S.D.
Bail rejected

C.R.M.(DB) 3598 of 2024

In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under
Section 439
of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to
section
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in
connection with Haringhata Police Station Case No. 236 of
2024 dated 11.05.2024 under
Sections 498A
/
304(B)
/
of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with
Sections 3
/
of the Dowry
Prohibition Act, 1961.

And

In Re : Firoj @ Firoz Mondal
...... petitioner
Mr. Shibaji Kumar Das
....for the petitioner

Ms. Shaila Afrin
Mr. Asif Dewan
....for the State

This is an application for bail under
Section 439
of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 corresponding to section 483

of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection

with Haringhata Police Station Case No. 236 of 2024 dated

11.05.2024 under
Sections 498A
/
304(B)
/
of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860 read with
Sections 3
/
of the Dowry Prohibition

Act, 1961.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

submits as follows. The petitioner is the husband of the victim
deceased. Although, initially the FIR was registered also under

Section 302
of the Indian Penal Code, the same charge was

deleted from the charge sheet. The petitioner is in custody for

150 days. Yet, only charge sheet has been submitted. The

matter has not even been committed for trial. So far as the

allegations under Section 498A of the Penal Code are

concerned, the same are general and omnibus in nature. Even

as regards Section 304B, there is hardly anything incriminating

available in the post mortem report.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on

the case diary and submits as follows. The incident of death

took place within 1 year and 8 months of the marriage. As

would appear from the post mortem report, there was no clear

finding that the death could have been suicidal in nature.

Moreover, certain bruises and abrasions were found in the body

of the victim. The Trial Court would obviously go by the

materials available and not by any particular finding of an

Investigating Officer.

Considering the fact that the death took place within 1

year and 8 months of marriage and in view of the incriminating

materials available in the case diary, we are not inclined to

grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

If the trial ensues, the same shall be expedited.

Thus, the application for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
Criminal Section is directed to provide certified copy of

this order, if applied for, to the parties upon completion of

requisite formalities.

(Biswaroop Chowdhury, J.) (Jay Sengupta, J.)