Calcutta High Court
CRM (A)/2305/2026 of PINTU MANDAL AND ANR Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL on 31 August 2026
Sl. No.35 Ct. 446/tkm C. R. M. ( A ) 2305 of 2026 In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mothabari Police Station Case No.464 of 2026 dated 16.06.2026 under sections
31.08.2026
Sl. No.35
Ct. 446/tkm
C. R. M. (A) 2305 of 2026
In Re: An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Mothabari Police Station Case No.464 of 2026 dated 16.06.2026 under sections 126(2)/115(2)/117(2)/76/109/303(2)/351(2)/3(5) BNS 2023
And
In Re: Pintu Mandal & Anr.
… … Petitioners
Allowed
Mr. M Chatterjee
… … for the petitioners
Mr. Aniruddha Bhattachaya
Ms. Priti Kar Bagchi
… … 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. It is informed that petitioner no. 1 has been arrested and subsequently granted bail. Hence, the application for anticipatory bail, so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, is dismissed as infructuous.
2. Mr. Chatterjee, learned Advocate for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is a member of the Panchayat Samity. Only to prevent the petitioner from attending the no-confidence motion against the Sabhapati, the present case has been initiated. He submits that subsequently, on the basis of similar allegations against some other persons who are members of the opposite group, another case has been initiated against those persons. He prays for anticipatory bail for the petitioner.
3. Learned Advocate for the State produces the case diary, memo of evidence and opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
4. Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials in the case diary, including the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 180 of the
2 BNSS. Considering the nature of the allegation and the fact that the alleged incident occurred in the presence of direct evidence, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not necessary and that the privilege under Section 482 of the BNSS can be extended in favour of the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, I direct that, in the event of arrest, the petitioner o. 2 viz. Beauty Mandal shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned CJM Malda and also subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
6. The application being CRM (A) 2305 of 2026 is disposed of.
(Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.)