Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3095/2026 of PRAMITA DAS @ PROTIMA DAS Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR on 29 September 2026
- 54 Court No.35 Rohan (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.( A ) 3095 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Tarakeswar Police Station
29.09.2026
Sl. No. - 54
Court No.35
Rohan
(Rejected)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(A) 3095 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Tarakeswar Police Station Case No. 434 of 2025 dated 12.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3)/115(2)/117(2)/118(1)/109/74/352/351(3)/
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
-And-
In the matter of: Pramita Das @ Protima Das …Petitioner Mr. Amitava Chowdhury Mr. Debasis Sur Mr. Dilip Kumar Das …for the Petitioner Mr. Ranjan Chakrabarti Mr. Abhijit Singh …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. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that other accused persons have been released on bail and charge-sheet has already been submitted.
2. Learned advocate appearing for the State has pointed out that the present application is the second application for anticipatory bail.
3. I have taken into account the submissions of the learned advocate for the petitioner and is of the opinion that there are no change of circumstances.
4. As earlier, in CRM (A) 1113 of 2026, the prayer for bail was refused, I am of the opinion that the present application is not maintainable.
2
5. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, namely, Pramita Das @ Protima Das is rejected.
6. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M. (A) 3095 of 2026 is dismissed.
7. Memo of evidence and the report submitted be kept with the record.
8. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)