Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3425/2026 of MANASI ROY @ MUNNA @ MANASHI DAS ROY AND ANR. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 8 October 2026
Court No.37 (Bench ID-265691) CHC Rejected In The High Court at Calcutta Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Appellate Side C.R.M.( A ) 3425 of 2026 In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Balurghat
08.10.2026
Item No.102
Court No.37
(Bench ID-265691)
CHC
Rejected
In The High Court at Calcutta
Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
C.R.M.(A) 3425 of 2026
In Re:- An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Balurghat Police Station vide First Information Report Case No. 455 of 2026 dated 04.07.2026 under Sections 85/
316(2)/318(2)/336(2)/338/ 351(2)/108/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
And
In the matter of: Manasi Roy @ Munna @ Manashi Das Roy & Anr.
...… petitioners
Ms. Sangeeta Roy, Advocate
Mr. Chandra Prakash, Advocate
Ms. Monalisa Maity, Advocate
.…for the petitioners
Mr. Parmanand Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Biswajit Tiwari, Advocate
Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
…for the State
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Petitioners seek anticipatory bail.
2. State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
3. Victim left behind a dying declaration implicating the petitioners.
4. Apparently, there was a ration-shop which initially belonged to the husband of the victim. Thereafter, of his death, the petitioner no.2 used to look after such ration-shop. Dying declaration states that, petitioner no.2 misappropriated the entire income of such ration shop without making over any payment to the victim. Consequently, she committed suicide.
2
5. Considering the involvement of the petitioners in the incident, I am unable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.
7. CRM(A) 3425 of 2026 is dismissed.
(Debangsu Basak, J.)
CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Digitally signed by CHINMOY CHAKRABORTY Date: 2026.10.09 18:53:51 +05'30'