Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2839/2026 of PINTU ROY AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 15 September 2026
Court No.35 Rohan (Partly Allowed) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE C.R.M.( A ) 2839 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Uttarpara Police Station
15.09.2026
M/L - 204
Court No.35
Rohan
(Partly
Allowed)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
C.R.M.(A) 2839 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Uttarpara Police Station Case No. 140 of 2026 dated 30.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 109/118(1)/118(2)/1126(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
-And-
In the matter of: Pintu Roy & Anr.
…Petitioners
Ms. Sananda Bhattacharyya
Mr. Himangshu Ghosh
…for the Petitioners
Mr. Kaustav Shome
Ms. Anindita Mukherjee
…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 the petitioners have been foisted with the present criminal case out of previous grudge.
2. Learned advocate for the State opposes the prayer for bail and draws the attention of the Court to the Injury Report as well as the statement of the injured.
3. I have taken into account the statement of the injured under Section 183 of the BNSS. Having considered the same, I am of the opinion that so far as the petitioner No. 1 (Pintu Roy) is concerned, he may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.
2
4. Having regard to the complicity of the petitioner No. 2 (Samar Roy), his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
5. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioner No. 1, namely, Pintu Roy, 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.
6. Since charge-sheet has already been submitted before the learned Jurisdictional Court, this order of anticipatory bail would be valid for a period of six weeks.
7. With the aforesaid observation, C.R.M. (A) 2839 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.)