Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2909/2026 of BIKASH SARKAR @ BIKASH KUMAR SARKAR AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 17 September 2026
Court No.35 Rohan (Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.( A ) 2909 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kalyani Police Station Case No.
17.09.2026
M/L - 222
Court No.35
Rohan
(Allowed)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(A) 2909 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Kalyani Police Station Case No. 646 of 2026
dated 14.06.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 85/80/103(1)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
-And-
In the matter of: Bikash Sarkar @ Bikash Kumar Sarkar & Anr.
…Petitioners
Mr. Shibaji Kr. Das
Ms. Deblina De
Ms. Maitrayee Das
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Amarta Ghose
Mr. P. Das
…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 petitioners submits that petitioner No. 1 is the uncle-in-law and petitioner No. 2 is mother- in-law of the deceased. But unfortunate incident, according to the petitioners, took place after two and a half years of the marriage having being solemnized. Learned advocate submits that petitioner No. 1 is residing at a separate mess but he has been foisted with the present case. So far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, the accusation against him are omnibus and general in nature.
2. Mr. Ghose, learned advocate appearing for the State, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. From the submissions of the learned advocates of either of the parties, I find that the husband is in custody. The complicity of the present petitioners, according to the case records, cannot be ruled out. However, on the anvil of custodial detention, when it is considered, I am of the view that custodial detention of the petitioners may not be warranted in the facts of the case.
3. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, namely, Bikash Sarkar @ Bikash Kumar Sarkar and Gitanjali Sarkar is allowed.
4. In the event of arrest, the petitioners be released on bail by the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer of the case on such terms and conditions as it deems fit and proper. This would be subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and/or under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. As investigation is in progress, petitioner No. 1 shall report to the Investigating Officer within a period of 10 days and on all subsequent dates as required by the Investigating Officer till the report in final form is submitted before the Jurisdictional Court.
6. Petitioner No. 2 shall make herself available before the Investigating Agency as and when called for.
7. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M. (A) 2909 of 2026 is disposed of.
8. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
9. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
10. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)