Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3165/2026 of RANA KUMAR GHOSH @ RANA KR. GHOSH Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 7 October 2026
No. 34 nb CRM( A ) 3165 of 2026 In Re.: An application for Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure corresponding to Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. In the matter of : Rana Kumar Ghosh @ Rana Kr. Ghosh ...… Petitioner. Mr. Mehedi Masud, …… for the
07.10.2026
Item No.4
Ct. No. 34
nb
CRM(A) 3165 of 2026
In Re.: An application for Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure corresponding to Section 482 of the B.N.S.S.
In the matter of: Rana Kumar Ghosh @ Rana Kr. Ghosh
...… Petitioner.
Mr. Mehedi Masud,
…… for the petitioner.
Mr. Goutam Dey,
Mr. Shankar Mukherjee,
..… For 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. Liberty is given to the petitioner to correct the date in the cause title
2. Memo of evidence be kept with the record.
3. Apprehending arrest the instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed on behalf of the petitioner claiming to be innocent person. It is submitted his name as transpired only from the statement of co-accused. He is reputed businessman having business of sweet meet shop, and small eateries. He is no way connected with instant case.
4. On behalf of the prosecution, serious objection has been raised and submits that there is a racket functioning to smuggle huge quantity of contraband items to Bangladesh and investigation is still in progress and hence, if the anticipatory bail is allowed, it would render the investigation otiose.
5. Having heard both the learned counsel and going through the materials on record as well as case diary and the nature of allegation levelled, prima facie, this court is of the view that since the name of the present petitioner not only surface from the statement of co- accused but the CDRs was also collected wherefrom the telephonic communication was existence with the present petitioner/principle accused is apparently found from the case diary. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow the prayer. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
6. All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. (CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
2