Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/3008/2026 of DIBAKAR MANDAL @ PALTU Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 22 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L.19. Rakib (Rejected) CRM ( A ) 3008 of 2026 In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliachak Police Station case no. 741 of 2026 dated 02.06.2026 under Sections and under Sections
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.
22.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L.19. Rakib (Rejected)
CRM (A) 3008 of 2026
In Re: An Application for Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kaliachak Police Station case no. 741 of 2026 dated 02.06.2026 under Sections and under Sections 21(C)/25/27A/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and under Section 25(1-B) of the Arms Act.
And In the matter of : Dibakar Mandal @ Paltu
……Petitioner. Mr. Arnab Chatterjee Mr. Avik Ghosh Ms. Ankusha Ghosh
.....for the Petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta Mr. Sreyash Kumar Singh
……for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in connection with the instant case. There are no materials against the present petitioner and has been implicated on the basis of statement of co- accused. It has also been contended that petitioner has no relations with the other accused persons who were intercepted at the spot and unnecessarily he has been foisted with the criminal case by the police authorities. Learned advocate appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that in the present case there has been alleged recovery of 455 grams of brown sugar along with 7 country-made pipe gun. Petitioner is FIR named and there is another criminal case under the NDPS Act against the present petitioner.
2 I have taken into account the facts of the case as also the other materials appearing. Considering that petitioner is wanted in more than one case, I am not inclined to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner in CRM (A) 3008 of 2026 is dismissed. Memo of evidence submitted by the State 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.)