The Calcutta High Court recently exercised its writ jurisdiction to cancel the bail granted to the accused in-laws. It cited the extraordinary circumstances at hand and the continuous torturous treatment allegedly meted out to a woman by her in-laws.
Justice Rajasekhar Mantha noted that 11 FIRs had already been filed against the accused, with chargesheets filed in ten of them.
Given this, the judge expressed surprise at the police’s failure to oppose the bail application moved in connection with the most recent FIR.
“It is perplexing to note that Kandi Police Station has not opposed the accused persons’ bail before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned, and that the ten charge-sheets already filed against the said accused persons have not been placed before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned,” the Court stated.
The Court also noted that all of the FIRs involved serious charges against the accused, such as rape, bodily harm, insulting a woman’s modesty, cruelty to a woman, and criminal intimidation.
As a result, the Court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to cancel the accused’s bail.
“This Court is of the view that the matter is indeed extraordinary in nature and calls for extraordinary measures. The petitioner is unmistakably a victim of ongoing torture and oppression. The charges under Sections 376 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code have been established prima facie in the police investigations,” the order stated.
The case, according to Justice Mantha, represented a sad state of affairs, and the accused could not be granted any liberty because they continue to pose a threat to the petitioner.
“These people have no regard for the law. Bail granted to them by the concerned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on February 6, 2023 is hereby cancelled by this Court in exercise of power conferred under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution,” the Court ruled.
The Kandi Police Station has been ordered to detain the five accused. Furthermore, the Court directed that police officers be stationed outside the woman’s home so that she could live there in peace, free of threat or intimidation from anyone.
The case is listed for further hearing on February 28, when the police are expected to file a report.
After requesting legal help from the State Legal Services Authority (SLSA), the petitioner-woman was represented by Advocate Rwitendra Banerjee. When the case was heard last week, the police authorities were not represented in court.
