Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/1864/2026 of AMIT KUMAR DEY AND ANR. Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 14 September 2026
Court No.35. M/L. 134. Kausik (Allowed) CRM ( A ) 1864 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 Kotwali Police Station Case No. 279 of 2026
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.
14.09.2026 Court No.35. M/L. 134. Kausik (Allowed)
CRM (A) 1864 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 Kotwali Police Station Case No. 279 of 2026 dated 16.05.2026 under Sections 316(2)/318(4)/115(2)/117(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
And In the matter of : Amit Kumar Dey & Anr.
……Petitioners.
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Krishan Ray
Mr. Pronojit Roy
Ms. Isita Kundu
……for the Petitioners.
Mr. Krishnendu Bhattacharjee
Mr. Mukesh Kr. Gupta
….for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the present case has been instituted for creating pressure upon the present petitioners. No criminal case has been made out. A civil dispute has been given the flavor of a criminal proceedings.
Learned advocate for the State submits that the documents collected by the investigating agency would reflect money transaction. Emphasis is on the agreement for sale and non-compliance of giving effect to the same. Prima facie, it is reflected that a part of the money was paid for which the
2 defacto complainant intends to implement the subject matter of the property related therein. Having regard to the subject matter of the case, I am of the opinion that custodial detention of the present petitioners are unwarranted. As such, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners are allowed. As such, I direct that in the event of arrest, the petitioners, namely, (1) Amit Kumar Dey, (2) Pijush Das 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. As the investigation of the case is in progress, petitioner shall report to the investigating officer within a period of 10 days and on all subsequent dates fixed till the report in final form is submitted before the jurisdictional Court. Accordingly, CRM (A) 1864 of 2026 is allowed. Memo of Evidence submitted 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.)