Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2804/2026 of SAMIR PRAMANICK Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. on 17 September 2026
Court No.35. D/L. 4. Kausik (Allowed) CRM ( A ) 2804 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 Nakashipara Police Station Case No. 697 of
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.
17.09.2026 Court No.35. D/L. 4. Kausik (Allowed)
CRM (A) 2804 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 Nakashipara Police Station Case No. 697 of 2026 dated 27.07.2026 under Sections 316(2)/303(2)/324(5)/75/351(2)/61(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 added Section 3(1)(r)(w)(i)(2)(v) of the SC&ST (POA) Act, 1989.
And In the matter of : Samir Pramanick
……Petitioner.
Mr. Milon Mukherjee, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Prabir Majumder
Mr. Snehansu Majumder
Mr. Debraj Shil
Ms. Sangeeta Choudhury
Ms. Anindita Kundu
……for the Petitioner.
Mr. Brajesh Jha
Mr. Debangan Bhattacharya
Mr. Soumya Raha
….for the State.
Report submitted by the State be kept with the record.
Inspite of service being effected by the police authorities none appears on behalf of the defacto complainant/private opposite party.
Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that subsequently the provisions of SC & ST (POA) Act has been added.
I have taken into account the statement of the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS, as the attention of the same has been drawn by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State, the accusations are against other accused persons. So far as the present petitioner is concerned, the statements under Section 180 of the BNSS reflect allegations of extraction of soil at a particular locality. The incident complained of initiates from 2011, emphasis was made on or about the year 2016 and its continuation thereafter.
Having considered the period of time for which the accusation has been made, I am of the view that the investigation should continue but custodial detention of the present petitioner is unwarranted.
Having considered the same, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner in CRM (A) 2804 of 2026 is allowed. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner, namely, Samir Pramanick 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.
Since the investigation is being carried out, petitioner shall report to the investigating officer within a period of 10 days and on all subsequent dates as and when required for the purposes of investigation till the report in final form is submitted before the jurisdictional Court. Accordingly, CRM (A) 2804 of 2026 is allowed.
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.)