Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2208/2026 of MD. BADSA ALAM AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 2 September 2026
Sl. No. 8 Ct. No. 446 SG [ALLOWED] C. R. M. ( A ) 2208 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case No. 3376/22 arising out of Chanchal Police Station Case No. 1451/2022 dated 12.12.2022 under
02.09.2026
Sl. No. 8
Ct. No. 446
SG
[ALLOWED]
C. R. M. (A) 2208 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with G.R. Case No. 3376/22 arising out of Chanchal Police Station Case No. 1451/2022
dated 12.12.2022 under Sections 494/323/376(2)(f)(i) of the Indian Penal Code.
And
In Re: Md. Badsa Alam & Anr.
… … Petitioners
Mr. Sourav Chatterjee.
… for the petitioners
Mr. Amal Kumar Dutta,
Mr. Neal Chakraborty.
… 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. Mr. Chatterjee, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners, submits that normal wear and tear of marital life has led to the registration of the present case. He submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted and that the complainant made some wild allegations against the brother-in-law out of grudge. However, during investigation, since no such materials were available to substantiate such allegations, the concerned Investigating Officer has submitted charge-sheet being No. 612/26 dated 21.07.2026 under Sections 498A/494/323/34 of the IPC. He submits that, in the present case, custodial interrogation of the present petitioners is not necessary and the benefit under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners.
2. Mr. Dutta, learned Advocate appearing for the State, produces the case diary opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
3. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the case diary and other materials on record. The charge-sheet has been submitted. Taking note of this fact, I am of the
2 view that custodial interrogation of the present petitioners is not necessary and that the privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioners.
4. In view of the above, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
5. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioners, viz. (1) Md. Badsa Alam and (2) Md. Saheb Ali be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each, with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chanchal and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
6. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)