Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3056/2026 of SANJIB KUMAR DAS AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 29 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L. 16. Kausik (Partly Allowed) CRM ( A ) 3056 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Gaighata Police Station Case No. 436
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.
29.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 16. Kausik (Partly Allowed)
CRM (A) 3056 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Gaighata Police Station Case No. 436 of 2026 dated 19.05.2026 under Sections 126(2)/124(1)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
And In the matter of : Sanjib Kumar Das & Anr.
……Petitioners.
Mr. Susnigdho Bhattacharyya
Ms. Sarmistha De
……for the Petitioners.
Mr. Uttam Kumar Mondal
Ms. Pramita Banerjee
….for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been foisted unnecessarily with the present criminal case.
State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
I have taken into account the materials appearing in the case diary which prima facie relate to throwing of acid upon the informant. Records also reflect that in the injury report petitioner no. 1 was specifically named.
Learned advocate for the State further submits that there are criminal antecedents of both the petitioners.
I have taken into account the antecedent of the petitioner no. 2 which relate to a matrimonial dispute. As such, considering the locus of the petitioner no. 2, I am of the opinion that her role and she being a lady, her custodial detention is unwarranted in the facts of the present case.
So far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected considering his complicity. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner no. 2, namely, Shila Biswas be released on bail subject to the satisfaction of the investigating officer/arresting officer of the case and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. As the investigation is in progress, petitioner no. 2 shall make herself available as and when called for by the investigating officer for the sake of investigation. Accordingly, CRM (A) 3056 of 2026 is partly allowed. Memo of Evidence submitted be kept with the record.
All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)