Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2849/2026 of ROHAN JHA Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 15 September 2026
Court No.35 Rohan (Rejected) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.( A ) 2849 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Narendrapur Police Station Case
15.09.2026
M/L - 208
Court No.35
Rohan
(Rejected)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(A) 2849 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Narendrapur Police Station Case No. 619 of 2026 dated 20.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/117(2)/118(2)/118(1)/324(4)/109/351(2)/
61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act.
-And-
In the matter of: Rohan Jha
…Petitioner
Mr. Aritra Bhattacharya
Mr. Avishek Das
…for the Petitioner
Mr. Indradip Das
Mr. Debayan Ghosh
…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 he has been falsely implicated in the present criminal case.
2. Learned advocate for the State has produced the case diary and draws the attention of the Court to statement of the injured under Section 183 of the BNSS as well as the injury report.
3. Having considered the same, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present petitioner.
4. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
2
5. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M. (A) 2849 of 2026 is dismissed.
6. Memo of evidence submitted be kept with the record.
7. All parties shall act in terms of the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court.
8. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)